Re: sendfile(2) SF_NOPUSH flag proposal
From: Terry Lambert (tlambert2_at_mindspring.com)
Date: 05/29/03
- Previous message: Igor Sysoev: "Re: sendfile(2) SF_NOPUSH flag proposal"
- In reply to: Igor Sysoev: "Re: sendfile(2) SF_NOPUSH flag proposal"
- Next in thread: Igor Sysoev: "Re: sendfile(2) SF_NOPUSH flag proposal"
- Reply: Igor Sysoev: "Re: sendfile(2) SF_NOPUSH flag proposal"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 08:36:59 -0700 To: Igor Sysoev <is@rambler-co.ru>
Igor Sysoev wrote:
> On Wed, 28 May 2003, Terry Lambert wrote:
> > Igor Sysoev wrote:
> > > > will result in you sleeping with PRUS_MORETOCOME set, but with
> > > > no more being sent because the send buffer doesn't get emptied,
> > > > as it's waiting for more data to send.
> > >
> > > But as I understand PRUS_MORETOCOME is not set if socket is non-blocking.
> >
> > Then the bug is still not fixed by setting it, since your total
> > send size might be less than `sysctl net.inet.tcp.sendspace`.
>
> Why ? We can reset TF_MORETOCOME if the sending is completed.
It's called a "deadly embrace" deadlock. Look it up.
-- Terry
_______________________________________________
freebsd-arch@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
- Previous message: Igor Sysoev: "Re: sendfile(2) SF_NOPUSH flag proposal"
- In reply to: Igor Sysoev: "Re: sendfile(2) SF_NOPUSH flag proposal"
- Next in thread: Igor Sysoev: "Re: sendfile(2) SF_NOPUSH flag proposal"
- Reply: Igor Sysoev: "Re: sendfile(2) SF_NOPUSH flag proposal"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
|