From owner-freebsd-hackers  Fri Dec 15 11:03:45 1995
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id LAA11292
          for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 15 Dec 1995 11:03:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rocky.sri.MT.net (rocky.sri.MT.net [204.182.243.10])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id LAA11287
          for <FreeBSD-hackers@FreeBSD.org>; Fri, 15 Dec 1995 11:03:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from nate@localhost) by rocky.sri.MT.net (8.6.12/8.6.12) id MAA17033; Fri, 15 Dec 1995 12:06:07 -0700
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 1995 12:06:07 -0700
From: Nate Williams <nate@rocky.sri.MT.net>
Message-Id: <199512151906.MAA17033@rocky.sri.MT.net>
To: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
Cc: nate@rocky.sri.MT.net, FreeBSD-hackers@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: sio overruns on 2.0.5R
In-Reply-To: <199512151859.FAA26342@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
References: <199512151859.FAA26342@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> >> After I switched to a Asus P55TP4XE 90Mc I see things like
> >> 
> >> sio0: 5 more silo overflows (total 7)
> 
> >I hate to sound like a broken record, but are you *sure* you're using
> >flow-control?  Can you use stty on the connected end to make sure?
> 
> Er, flow control has no effect on silo overflows.

Really?  If a machine doesn't provide flow control can't you over-run
the buffers if the machine gets loaded down and the interrupt load gets
so bad that the sio interrupt handler isn't called enough.  However, if
you use flow control shouldn't it stop the buffer from getting
overflowed simply because no more data is being received.

Am I totally out to lunch here?  I know that I get lots of silo
over-flows when I don't use flow control and push the line fast, where
as soon as I turn on flow control they go away.


Nate