lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Jun]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: select for UNIX sockets?
From
Date
"David Schwartz" <davids@webmaster.com> writes:

> It really doesn't matter. UDP applications have to control the transmit
> pacing at application level. There is absolutely no way for the kernel to
> know whether the path to the recipient is congested or not.

Because what? The kernel knows everything it has to know - i.e. complete
state of socket queue in question.

But if select() on sockets is illegal, should we make it return -Esth
instead of success. Certainly, we should get rid of invalid kernel code,
right?

> The kernel can't tell you when to send because that depends upon
> factors
> that are remote.

Such as?

> Yes, it would be nice of the kernel helped more. But the application
> has to
> deal with remote packet loss as well.

Could you please show me a place in the kernel which could cause such
a loss on local datagram sockets?
--
Krzysztof Halasa
Network Administrator
-
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 13:36    [W:0.076 / U:0.740 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site