From nobody Tue Oct 22 17:57:03 2024 X-Original-To: net@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4XY0Hg6hNhz5Vgrb for ; Tue, 22 Oct 2024 17:57:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org", Issuer "R11" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4XY0Hg42FJz4d8H for ; Tue, 22 Oct 2024 17:57:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=freebsd.org; s=dkim; t=1729619823; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=NUq5JITZxLS/SKb44HnVn4Oyh/ozmf178Fta8xh4+aU=; b=uJG/E2JOqx7mMdK19g3rXHaMEP2YL9eEmeHv34HD/fepvP+Ia7pildCjXBfjZNUEJ6FbJ0 Y37yGdqnpqe4vbV6lVCQA5pjXtaSyis/55ujje/BLREIK71++IzjOnX15kNZIx3cLmj6i7 UV5oiON09xcvys6wIM3CWxPdEKDWANGJAnHEp/8Y1Up9Lh89ONJcVmckHWvUbyFFpt5qG4 DMFRu2SGch55euZYaUPUP3Y+qrWl//dUs4pDXu++h9IjUXVwKRnhySl128wyto7SGq53BD ul8F7IKdzCZDRfFQHxlX2d+bQ+UEXhN55hVZjOa+hHH72YdSzdDn4G/O+9nfWQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx1.freebsd.org; none ARC-Seal: i=1; s=dkim; d=freebsd.org; t=1729619823; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=mNyECZUse1yp50anNqMzL4MRt9V3lt97JFHxx2A+S00LAB050PB/iA4V4rFQG7ZXYZHk9S PGsCkYpKbzygfqcppzFhVilr0U6CUSBLKnkdkbwIgAgngf3KT1Uw+gQry7GoyTNPqpgbWx 8cMuswzuslnTDkM7/hWa7WYi/zYg3VyqNHEMPCR4olekjiovA8OnU1FrdmF1ZgVb4LmMvQ dJPxpPh8Nmua2PqLNpPprXENi3pySqudjUj59ku+Nk+Yolon/EH+6gzMO+20ceBmijZ0/4 LpDt5H75CsXtLWmaoiGdbIc7wnZfLkwa2O1gTUgkog7uEgzAWMzyXc2WNtYEgQ== Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:1d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4XY0Hg3V3szPRv for ; Tue, 22 Oct 2024 17:57:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.5]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 49MHv3at068801 for ; Tue, 22 Oct 2024 17:57:03 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: (from www@localhost) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id 49MHv3HN068800 for net@FreeBSD.org; Tue, 22 Oct 2024 17:57:03 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: kenobi.freebsd.org: www set sender to bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org using -f From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: net@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 280386] if_bridge throws output errors under load Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2024 17:57:03 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: 14.1-RELEASE X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Only Me X-Bugzilla-Who: kbowling@freebsd.org X-Bugzilla-Status: Open X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: net@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-net List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org MIME-Version: 1.0 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D280386 --- Comment #24 from Kevin Bowling --- (In reply to pascal.guitierrez from comment #23) Thanks for reporting back. That is very interesting. There are two possibilities that come to mind 1) the RACK stack is correctly identifying the loss as feedback for it's flow/congestion control or 2) the RACK stack has some feature that is causing it to not overflow the lower layers. I'll see if I can find someone with more recent TCP stack experience to gla= nce at this and provide any additional insight or suggestions for the base stac= k. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=