[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4D90CB17.4030205@hartkopp.net>
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2011 19:53:27 +0200
From: Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@...tkopp.net>
To: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>
CC: Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@...ndegger.com>,
socketcan-users@...ts.berlios.de, Netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: poll broken (for can)
On 28.03.2011 18:13, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote:
> On 03/28/2011 05:55 PM, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:
>>> BTW: I figured out why poll() wakes you up but the next write will fail
>>> with -ENOBUFS again.
>>
>> Ah, I'm curious? I also did realize that poll does burn CPU cycles
>> (instead of waiting).
>
> The poll callback checks if the used memory is less than the half of per
> socket snd buffer (IIRC ~60K). See:
>
> datagram_poll (http://lxr.linux.no/linux+v2.6.38/net/core/datagram.c#L737)
> sock_writeable (http://lxr.linux.no/linux+v2.6.38/include/net/sock.h#L1618)
>
> Because the size of a can frame (+the skb overhead) is much less then
> the ethernet frame (+overhead) the default value for the snd buffer is
> too big for can.
>
> We get the -ENOBUF from write() if the tx_queue_len (default 10) is
> exceeded.
>
> http://lxr.linux.no/linux+v2.6.38/drivers/net/can/dev.c#L435
> http://lxr.linux.no/linux+v2.6.38/net/can/af_can.c#L268
>
What would be your suggestion? Decreasing the socket send buffer for CAN by
default?
Regards,
Oliver
--
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists