On 7/3/15, 10:10 AM, "Tom Herbert" <t...@herbertland.com> wrote:
>On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 6:21 PM, Lawrence Brakmo <bra...@fb.com> wrote: >> This is a request for comments. >> >> TCP-NV (New Vegas) is a major update to TCP-Vegas. An earlier version of >> NV was presented at 2010's LPC (slides). It is a delayed based >> congestion avoidance for the data center. This version has been tested >> within a 10G rack where the HW RTTs are 20-50us. >> >> A description of TCP-NV, including implementation and experimental >> results, can be found at: >> >>https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v1/url?u=http://www.brakmo.org/networki >>ng/tcp-nv/TCPNV.html&k=ZVNjlDMF0FElm4dQtryO4A%3D%3D%0A&r=m30SgjN07T%2FK%2 >>FdV1ZIt1iA%3D%3D%0A&m=vqkRy6FmoxrfPZVJumijB%2B1wrVylIcWDPCz5JB6%2Blp0%3D% >>0A&s=232c928c0c7acaf211a56119e00288f4cc11cff70beef2159933f7667d59a773 >> >> The current version includes many module parameters to support >> experimentation with the parameters. >> >> >> +module_param(nv_pad, int, 0644); >> +MODULE_PARM_DESC(nv_pad, "extra packets above congestion level"); >> +module_param(nv_reset_period, int, 0644); >> +MODULE_PARM_DESC(nv_reset_period, "nv_min_rtt reset period (secs)"); >> +module_param(nv_min_cwnd, int, 0644); >> +MODULE_PARM_DESC(nv_min_cwnd, "NV will not decrease cwnd below this >>value" >> + " without losses"); >> +module_param(nv_dec_eval_min_calls, int, 0644); >> +MODULE_PARM_DESC(nv_dec_eval_min_calls, "Wait for this many data >>points " >> + "before declaring congestion (< 256)"); >> +module_param(nv_ssthresh_eval_min_calls, int, 0644); >> +MODULE_PARM_DESC(nv_ssthresh_eval_min_calls, "Wait for this many data >>points " >> + "before declaring congestion during initial >>slow-start"); >> +module_param(nv_rtt_min_cnt, int, 0644); >> +MODULE_PARM_DESC(nv_rtt_min_cnt, "Wait for this many RTTs before >>declaring" >> + " congestion (<64)"); >> +module_param(nv_cong_decrease_mult, int, 0644); >> +MODULE_PARM_DESC(nv_cong_decrease_mult, "Congestion decrease factor"); >> +module_param(nv_ssthresh_factor, int, 0644); >> +MODULE_PARM_DESC(nv_ssthresh_factor, "ssthresh factor"); >> +module_param(nv_rtt_factor, int, 0644); >> +MODULE_PARM_DESC(nv_rtt_factor, "rtt averaging factor (0-256)"); >> +module_param(nv_rtt_cnt_inc_delta, int, 0644); >> +MODULE_PARM_DESC(nv_rtt_cnt_inc_delta, "decrease cwnd for this many >>RTTs " >> + "every 100 RTTs"); >> +module_param(nv_dec_factor, int, 0644); >> +MODULE_PARM_DESC(nv_dec_factor, "decrease cwnd every ~192 RTTS by >>factor/8"); >> +module_param(nv_loss_dec_factor, int, 0644); >> +MODULE_PARM_DESC(nv_loss_dec_factor, "on loss new cwnd = cwnd * this / >>1024"); >> +module_param(nv_cwnd_growth_factor, int, 0644); >> +MODULE_PARM_DESC(nv_cwnd_growth_factor, "larger => cwnd grows slower"); >> + >A lot of module parameters... can these be sysctls? I think module parameters are less intrusive than sysctls. These parameters are there for experimentation and expect many of them will be removed in the future after more testing and experimentation. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
