On Tue, 2016-04-19 at 09:47 +, David Laight wrote:
> From: Eric Dumazet
> > Sent: 19 April 2016 00:18
> ...
> > MSG_EOR should not depend on SKBTX_ANY_TSTAMP
> >
> > Really, simply using send(fd, ..., len, MSG_EOR) should instruct TCP to
> > mark the cooked skb as a non candidate for future co
From: Eric Dumazet
> Sent: 19 April 2016 00:18
...
> MSG_EOR should not depend on SKBTX_ANY_TSTAMP
>
> Really, simply using send(fd, ..., len, MSG_EOR) should instruct TCP to
> mark the cooked skb as a non candidate for future coalescing.
Isn't that very similar to the inverse of MSG_MORE?
Or a s
On Mon, 2016-04-18 at 20:18 -0700, Martin KaFai Lau wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 07:50:41PM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > I believe it is slightly wrong (to do the goto new_segment if there is
> > no data to send)
> Aha. Thanks for pointing it out.
>
> >
> > I would instead use this fast path
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 07:50:41PM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> I believe it is slightly wrong (to do the goto new_segment if there is
> no data to send)
Aha. Thanks for pointing it out.
>
> I would instead use this fast path, doing the test _when_ we already
> have an skb to test for.
The v1 was
On Mon, 2016-04-18 at 19:27 -0700, Martin KaFai Lau wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 05:06:57PM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > It should only be a request from user space to ask TCP to not aggregate
> > stuff on future sendpage()/sendmsg() on the skb carrying this new flag.
> >
> How about somethin
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 05:06:57PM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> It should only be a request from user space to ask TCP to not aggregate
> stuff on future sendpage()/sendmsg() on the skb carrying this new flag.
>
How about something like this. Please advise if tcp_sendmsg_noappend can
be simpler.
On Mon, 2016-04-18 at 16:43 -0700, ka...@fb.com wrote:
> >
> > netperf could then get an option to set this MSG_EOR ;)
> Not sure how it is related. Can you share how netperf can
> benefit from MSG_EOR in TCP tests without any of the
> SOF_TIMESTAMPING_TX_RECORD_MASK.
Simply setting MSG_EOR woul
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 04:18:13PM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Mon, 2016-04-18 at 15:46 -0700, Martin KaFai Lau wrote:
> > This patch allows the user process to use MSG_EOR during
> > tcp_sendmsg to tell the kernel that it is the last byte
> > of an application response message.
> >
> > It is c
On Mon, 2016-04-18 at 15:46 -0700, Martin KaFai Lau wrote:
> This patch allows the user process to use MSG_EOR during
> tcp_sendmsg to tell the kernel that it is the last byte
> of an application response message.
>
> It is currently useful when the end-user has turned on any bit of the
> SOF_TIME
This patch allows the user process to use MSG_EOR during
tcp_sendmsg to tell the kernel that it is the last byte
of an application response message.
It is currently useful when the end-user has turned on any bit of the
SOF_TIMESTAMPING_TX_RECORD_MASK (either by setsockopt or cmsg).
The kernel will
10 matches
Mail list logo
