From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <46C0B9F7.9060103@domain.hid>
Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 22:07:19 +0200
From: Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@domain.hid>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <46C0719B.1010102@domain.hid> <46C07AF2.60402@domain.hid>
	<46C07D73.7070302@domain.hid> <46C080C8.10906@domain.hid>
	<46C0835E.8010105@domain.hid> <46C0B036.3030306@domain.hid>
	<46C0B1DF.6090509@domain.hid>
In-Reply-To: <46C0B1DF.6090509@domain.hid>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Xenomai-help] rtcan bufferoverflow but no evidence
List-Id: Help regarding installation and common use of Xenomai
	<xenomai.xenomai.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-help>,
	<mailto:xenomai-help-request@domain.hid>
List-Archive: </public/xenomai-help>
List-Post: <mailto:xenomai@xenomai.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xenomai-help-request@domain.hid>
List-Subscribe: <https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-help>,
	<mailto:xenomai-help-request@domain.hid>
To: rolandtollenaar@domain.hid
Cc: xenomai-help <xenomai@xenomai.org>

Roland Tollenaar wrote:
> Hi Wolfgang,
> 
>>> See below. This does not look good. Does it mean that I am only 
>>> always reading out the last socket and the rest are having their 
>>> buffers pumped full? Should I be unbinding somehow?
>>
>> Don't know, check your code ;-).
> Thanks that is exactly what I did because I thought I was unbinding. 
> rt_dev_close () should do that for me correct? Its not. At least not 
> reliably. :(

That's wired. You mean you called rt_dev_close() and the socket still 
does show up in /proc/rtcan_sockets? Is it possible that there is 
another task still using that socket? Could you show the code fragment 
doing that.

Wolfgang.