lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Feb]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
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 <greearb@candelatech.com> <Ben_Greear AT excite.com>
President of Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com
ScryMUD: http://scry.wanfear.com http://scry.wanfear.com/~greear


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:24    [W:0.059 / U:17.972 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site