From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Aug 14 00:58:40 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90CA8E06; Wed, 14 Aug 2013 00:58:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nparhar@gmail.com) Received: from mail-pd0-x233.google.com (mail-pd0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c02::233]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 634EE224D; Wed, 14 Aug 2013 00:58:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pd0-f179.google.com with SMTP id v10so5635701pde.24 for ; Tue, 13 Aug 2013 17:58:40 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=l0gtmYI8w3ow18b8485TngBkot2QGeS3/hbuRwHpMzo=; b=g5Jmf9bMZPa3sfBIZzjpeAyD4HNglObwCmw9ukaz4DzPOVDuHaMOLumyT0QUIGZl7Q P1+Hmbg+bELRyVwwCtEhZTRV/7uSPlrEsY+YFeFBGnmo68xxDVAjuR2IGPu7hkvYxpaG couFwjd86IwqvloIhpzpzWaP9sXNjlxezXBSLgZvR2Ljlfp9MXMJ25p2y/rbA6vEfNR7 dGb6cp6I7kTt9C6x2Rev+t9WqydqYuw9aKAILjw4DEYiVZMGAVdXzZrFTt3fXpsWY1nN fmoibM5/kvMKsezCUVooyKrwlSXj0fp1DT4THBOCycUXc/WiiYL+iT/x5uZeZ6VoW3yF 6Gpw== X-Received: by 10.68.252.233 with SMTP id zv9mr7074648pbc.69.1376441920125; Tue, 13 Aug 2013 17:58:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.192.166.0] (stargate.chelsio.com. [67.207.112.58]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id z14sm46766146pbt.0.2013.08.13.17.58.37 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 13 Aug 2013 17:58:38 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Navdeep Parhar Message-ID: <520AD63C.1080801@FreeBSD.org> Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2013 17:58:36 -0700 From: Navdeep Parhar User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130808 Thunderbird/17.0.8 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Julian Elischer Subject: Re: TSO and FreeBSD vs Linux References: <520A6D07.5080106@freebsd.org> <520A6EC6.6050208@FreeBSD.org> <520AD486.6050708@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <520AD486.6050708@freebsd.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: FreeBSD Net X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2013 00:58:40 -0000 On 08/13/13 17:51, Julian Elischer wrote: > On 8/14/13 1:37 AM, Navdeep Parhar wrote: >> On 08/13/13 10:29, Julian Elischer wrote: >> .. >>> Has anyone done any work on aggregating ACKs, or delaying responding to >>> them? >> If LRO is enabled on the FreeBSD receiver, ACKs are already aggregated >> (a duplicate ACK will result in an immediate flush though.) See >> tcp_lro_rx. > not always, , certainly not with XEN (xn0) on EC2. It will vary from driver to driver and how many frames a driver gets to (or chooses to) process in one run of its interrupt handler.