Re: [PATCH] softirq: let ksoftirqd do its job

On 08/31/2016 04:11 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:

On Wed, 2016-08-31 at 15:47 -0700, Rick Jones wrote:

quoted

With regard to drops, are both of you sure you're using the same socket
buffer sizes?

Does it really matter ?

At least at points in the past I have seen different drop counts at the 
SO_RCVBUF based on using (sometimes much) larger sizes.  The hypothesis 
I was operating under at the time was that this dealt with those 
situations where the netserver was held-off from running for "a little 
while" from time to time.  It didn't change things for a sustained 
overload situation though.

quoted

In the meantime, is anything interesting happening with TCP_RR or
TCP_STREAM?

TCP_RR is driven by the network latency, we do not drop packets in the
socket itself.

I've been of the opinion it (single stream) is driven by path length. 
Sometimes by NIC latency.  But then I'm almost always measuring in the 
LAN rather than across the WAN.

happy benchmarking,

rick