| To: | Gleb Natapov <gleb@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: netlink drops messages. |
| From: | Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 17 Jan 2001 17:14:38 +0100 |
| Cc: | Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxx>, kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20010117155035.C16180@nbase.co.il>; from gleb@nbase.co.il on Wed, Jan 17, 2001 at 02:51:48PM +0100 |
| References: | <20010116200600.C5122@nbase.co.il> <200101161828.VAA31502@ms2.inr.ac.ru> <20010117101720.F5122@nbase.co.il> <20010117120652.A1830@fred.local> <20010117133932.B16180@nbase.co.il> <20010117141900.A3308@fred.local> <20010117155035.C16180@nbase.co.il> |
| Sender: | owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Wed, Jan 17, 2001 at 02:51:48PM +0100, Gleb Natapov wrote: > > You are trying to say that if I'll connect to my router via 9600 serial line > and run 'ip monitor' > there the routing daemon will not be able to feed routes to the kernel > quicker than ip monitor will > be able to read them and send output via slow serial line?! Somehow 9600 > serial line become a > bottleneck! Are you sure about that, or I misunderstood you? You misunderstood me. The kernel side doesn't do any flow control, it just drops messages when the buffers fill up. The user side does flow control by blocking or EAGAIN, e.g. you submitting new routes. -Andi -- This is like TV. I don't like TV. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: netlink drops messages., Andi Kleen |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: netlink drops messages., James R. Leu |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: netlink drops messages., Gleb Natapov |
| Next by Thread: | Re: netlink drops messages., Gleb Natapov |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |