netdev - Re: poll broken (for can)

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 30 Mar 2011 00:05:18 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	socketcan@...tkopp.net
Cc:	mkl@...gutronix.de, wg@...ndegger.com,
	socketcan-users@...ts.berlios.de, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: poll broken (for can)

From: Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@...tkopp.net>
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 22:03:12 +0200

> Hm - the problem could be that people expect their frames to be sent 'in
> time', so if we increase the tx_queue_len, it's not transparent when the
> frames are potentially leaving the system - and if the application data is
> already out-dated when hitting the medium.
> 
> What about having up to three CAN frames in each CAN_RAW socket send buffer
> and e.g.50 frames in the tx_queue_len of the netdevice as a starting point?

Setting tx_queue_len low is bound to cause all kinds of problems.

This poll() peculiarity is just one such problem.

I would suggest increasing it for CAN devices to at least 100.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html