This is merely a historical archive of years 2008-2021, before the migration to mailman3.
A maintained and still updated list archive can be found at https://lists.osmocom.org/hyperkitty/list/OpenBSC@lists.osmocom.org/.
Pablo Neira Ayuso pablo at gnumonks.orgHi! On Sun, Apr 05, 2015 at 03:46:16PM +0200, Harald Welte wrote: > Hi Holger, Pablo, Ciaby, > > On Sat, Apr 04, 2015 at 09:05:20AM +0200, Holger Hans Peter Freyther wrote: > > * Linux/TCP will run nagle to combine these messages > > we could easily disable nagle if that's what we want to avoid > latencies [see below] > > > I wonder if there is a better way? For reading we could read > > until -EWOULDBLOCK but then this might not be too fair for > > the other parts of the software. > > In terms of msgb reading, I think a fixed upper limit might make sense, > i.e. read up to [configurable] N messages in one BSC_FD_READ callback. I think the same, batching seems like the way to go to me. [...] > > Is there a TCP mode where a "write" either fully succeeds or fails > > with -ENOSPC or such? > > Not to my knowledge. The proper answer would probably to use DCCP or > SCTP or any other protocol that can provide reliable delivery of packets > (possibly with ordering guarantees) and not abuse a stream protocol > like TCP. This would of course break IPA compatibility... but it might > be an interesting experiment to compare different L4 protocol > performance against TCP for the given use case. Looking at the current state of art of the Linux stack, TCP is very well tuned and there are more people looking into it than those other protocols.