From: "Ilpo_Järvinen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2007 00:55:57 +0300 (EEST)
> On Sat, 24 Mar 2007, David Miller wrote: > > > From: "Ilpo_Järvinen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 20:41:02 +0200 > > > > > It is guaranteed to be valid only when !tp->sacked_out. In most > > > cases this seqno is available in the last ACK but there is no > > > guarantee for that. The new fast recovery loss marking algorithm > > > needs this as entry point. > > > > It's a shame we keep around multiple values which represent very > > related values. For example, this new seqno could be computed > > using "fackets_out" if we knew also how many holes there were. > > It would then be an estimate which is 100% accurate in most cases (when > all related skbs are full sized). I think it must never underestimate > highest_sack though, it would be quite ok to use fackets_out * mss but any > > mss skb would obviously be a problem (if they ever occur)... Are all > paths ok with that (this is beoynd the codepaths I'm quite sure of...)?! Right, I understand that we really can't even use such an estimate because of the "full mss size" assumption. In any event, maybe we can find another way to "integrate" other values we maintain in tcp_sock we can be computed from other ones cheaply. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
