From owner-freebsd-net Sat Jul 29 13:46:45 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from silby.com (cb34181-a.mdsn1.wi.home.com [24.14.173.39]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 12AF137B8B7 for ; Sat, 29 Jul 2000 13:46:41 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from silby@silby.com) Received: (qmail 26327 invoked by uid 1000); 29 Jul 2000 20:46:39 -0000 Received: from localhost (sendmail-bs@127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 29 Jul 2000 20:46:39 -0000 Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 15:46:39 -0500 (CDT) From: Mike Silbersack To: "Justin C. Walker" Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: sub-optimal tcp_ouput() performance in the face of ENOBUFS In-Reply-To: <200007291810.LAA14583@scv2.apple.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Sat, 29 Jul 2000, Justin C. Walker wrote: > On Saturday, July 29, 2000, at 10:56 AM, Mike Silbersack wrote: > > > In the case of ip_output returning ENOBUFS to tcp_output, tcp_output > > returns 0, even though there's an error. (I guess if the ENOBUFS case was > > handled properly, 0 would be correct. But for now, it's certainly an > > error.) > > > > But tcp_output returning an error wouldn't matter anyway, since nothing > > which calls tcp_output actually checks the return value. > > Thanks for the clarification. > > FWIW in our source (FB3.2-based), while a lot of calls are cast as (void), > the returned error actually is checked in a number of places > (tcp_usrreq.c). These eventually wander back into user space, I think. > > Regards, > > Justin Yep, you're correct. I must've been tired when I grepped last night. Do you guys handle ip_output returning ENOBUFS any differently/better in Darwin as of now? Mike "Silby" Silbersack To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message