netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eric Lemoine <Eric.Lemoine@ens-lyon.fr>
To: Eric Lemoine <Eric.Lemoine@ens-lyon.fr>
Cc: netdev@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: udp weirdness
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 14:02:24 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20020927120223.GH343@hookipa> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20020924065046.GF392@hookipa>

On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 08:50:46AM +0200, Eric Lemoine wrote:
> I'm observing some UDP weirdness, or I'd better say some UDP behaviour
> that I can't explain.
> 
> Two machines: one sending a UDP flow (using sendto) and another receiving 
> this UDP flow (using bind + recv). 
> 
> When the dgram length is lower that 357 Bytes I observe strange results
> at the send side. My home-made udp_tx program gives the following:
> 
> $./udp_tx -h 192.168.4.1 -m 357
> 357 1312621 357.518
> 
> 357 is the dgram length (in B), 1312621 the number of dgrams sent and 
> 357.518 the perceived thruput (in Mbits/s). The weirdness is that I
> get 357.518 Mbits/s whereas the underlying network is 10Mbits/s!
> 
> At the receive side the results are consistent (obviously):
> 
> $./udp_rx -m 357
> 357 29519 8.00884
> 
> <netstat -s --udp> on the send machine before and after the run also
> gives me such a large amount of sent packets (~1312700), whereas
> </sbin/ifconfig> confirms that about 29519 packets have been sent
> out.
> 
> Below 357 Bytes, the same kind of results are observed. Above 357 Bytes,
> the results make more sense to me:
> 
> $./udp_tx -h 192.168.4.1 -m 358
> 358 29505 8.04393
> 
> $./udp_rx -m 358
> 358 29468 8.0179
> 
> Does anybody know where I lose packets? And why do I lose them only when
> the dgram length is below 357 Bytes?
> 
> BTW, I'm running 2.4.18-vanilla w/ the 3c59x driver.

I figured out that packets can be dropped in pfifo_fast_enqueue()
[the default qdisc's enqueue func], even though the driver/kernel 
flow control has triggered. 

And sendto does not notify the user when packet gets dropped because 
the output queue overflows (as indicated in sendto manpage).

Why doesn't the kernel just put the process into sleep instead of 
dropping packets?

Thanks.
-- 
Eric

  reply	other threads:[~2002-09-27 12:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-09-24  6:50 udp weirdness Eric Lemoine
2002-09-27 12:02 ` Eric Lemoine [this message]
2002-09-27 14:53   ` jamal
2002-09-27 15:04     ` Matti Aarnio
2002-09-29 14:47       ` jamal
2002-09-30  8:49         ` Eric Lemoine
2002-09-30 11:09           ` jamal
2002-09-30 12:10           ` jamal
2002-09-30 12:23             ` jamal
2002-10-01  0:22               ` PATCH " jamal
2002-10-01  6:35                 ` Eric Lemoine
2002-10-01  9:51                   ` jamal
2002-10-01 13:53                 ` kuznet
2002-10-01 14:14                   ` jamal
2002-10-01 14:26                   ` Chris Friesen
2002-10-01 14:40                     ` kuznet
2002-10-01 14:52                       ` Chris Friesen
2002-10-01 15:31                         ` kuznet
2002-10-01 16:16                           ` Chris Friesen
2002-10-01 16:41                             ` kuznet
2002-10-01 17:17                               ` Chris Friesen
2002-10-01 16:42                           ` Ben Greear
2002-10-01 16:58                             ` Chris Friesen
2002-10-01 17:55                             ` jamal
2002-10-01 18:36                               ` Chris Friesen
2002-10-01 18:35                                 ` jamal
2002-10-01 18:54                                   ` Ben Greear
2002-10-01 19:03                                   ` Chris Friesen
2002-10-01 18:52                               ` Ben Greear
2002-10-02 11:13                           ` Eric Lemoine
2002-10-02 14:09                             ` Chris Friesen
2002-10-02 15:25                             ` Ben Greear
2002-10-03 15:58                               ` Eric Lemoine
2002-10-03 16:29                                 ` kuznet
2002-09-27 15:19     ` Eric Lemoine
2002-09-27 15:57     ` Eric Lemoine

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20020927120223.GH343@hookipa \
    --to=eric.lemoine@ens-lyon.fr \
    --cc=netdev@oss.sgi.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).