[lkml]   [2002]   [Feb]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: want opinions on possible glitch in 2.4 network error reporting

Alan Cox wrote:

>>>That is correct UDP behaviour
>>This is totally untrue, unless the socket doing non-blocking I/O -- and
>>even then you get -1 and EAGAIN from sendto.
> Not the case.

Are you claiming that you will never see -1 and EAGAIN on a nonblocking
UDP socket with sendto? If so, I'll bet you a kernel patch that you are not
correct (I get to write the patch and you include it :) )

>>there is no way to "lose" that data before it hits the wire, unless of
>>course the network driver is broken and doesn't plug the upper layers when
>>its TX queue is full.
> UDP is not flow controlled.

If it makes it through sendto, where can it be dropped before it
hits the wire? I doubt the socket buffers are anthing other than FIFO,
and the same goes for the ethernet/device queue. Since we (can) know
at sendto whether or not the PDU was enqueued for transmit, it seems
trivial to notify user space of success/failure of the local network
stack, and I believe this is what is done.

Now granted, it can be dropped anywhere outside of the machine, but
I can see no good reason to drop it inside the machine.

Ben Greear <> <Ben_Greear AT>
President of Candela Technologies Inc

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:24    [W:0.058 / U:3.328 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site