On Mon, 25 Aug 2008, Thomas Jarosch wrote: > On Friday, 22. August 2008 23:18:44 Ilpo Järvinen wrote: > > In the meantime, can you check the attached patches. Besides the kernel > > patch, you need to build your own patched iproute2 as well to configure > > the features (ip tool among them is enough in case the build of some other > > part of the toolset fails like it did for me). I somewhat tested them, and > > the result seemed to be what I'd expect (I just forced RTOs with some > > netem heavy dropping and quickly glanced over the resulting packet > > patterns near RTO). > > Your patches work fine. Thanks for testing. > I've noticed two small things: > 1. Maybe it's a good idea to add a note above the tcp_use_frto() change > to explain that the value is negated. Took me a while to figure out > why there is no "!" in there :-) > 2. Maybe rename the "features" option in iproute2 to "disable_features". > Then it would be more intuitive what it does. First of all I hate doing anything which has an user interface stamp in it... :-) Second, didn't I write about this negation in some of the log messages... /me looks for that... hmm... I think I did ...and that's besides the very clear help text :-). Yeah, it was just that the earlier ip already prints the field as "features" though I guess changing also that is a non-problem to existing userspace stuff because of the current usage of the field. There's this RTAX_FEATURE_ALLFRAG stuff which somebody could be looking for but I don't know how likely that will be. But anyway, point taken. I'll try to change both to disable_features and see if that gets accepted. -- i.
