[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [lwip-users] Intention of poll, tcp_output() in tcp_slowtmr()call.
From: |
Robert |
Subject: |
Re: [lwip-users] Intention of poll, tcp_output() in tcp_slowtmr()call. |
Date: |
Fri, 5 Mar 2004 08:12:12 -0500 (EST) |
On Wed, 3 Mar 2004, David Aldrich wrote:
> I found a thread called "Intention of poll,tcp_output() in
> tcp_slowtmr()call." started in January 2003 by Michael Portmann that
> describes a problem I have stumbled across. Here is the original
> message:
David, in my case, I am using the "raw" interface, the one with callbacks.
Sounds like you are doing that as well. My application creates output in
the form of "messages", and sends them with tcp_write() once they are
ready to transmit. It was my assumption that the reason output is not sent
immediately based on a call to tcp_write() is because it may be that two
or more packets could be combined, and therefore sent more efficiently.
This strategy makes sense for an application like ftpd, or even httpd,
where traffic is not very interactive, but works poorly for something like
telnetd.
My solution was to call tcp_output() directly for each call to tcp_write()
unless the call to tcp_write returned an error.
--
Best Regards,
Robert
Join the fight against spam, support the do-not-email list.
- [lwip-users] Intention of poll,tcp_output() in tcp_slowtmr()call., David Aldrich, 2004/03/04
- Re: [lwip-users] Intention of poll, tcp_output() in tcp_slowtmr()call., marek, 2004/03/08
- Re: [lwip-users] Intention of poll, tcp_output() in tcp_slowtmr()call.,
Robert <=
- Re: [lwip-users] Intention of poll, tcp_output() in tcp_slowtmr()call., Larry Piggins, 2004/03/09
- Re: [lwip-users] Intention of poll, tcp_output() in tcp_slowtmr()call., Kieran Mansley, 2004/03/10