From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030467AbWAGWfU (ORCPT ); Sat, 7 Jan 2006 17:35:20 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752593AbWAGWfT (ORCPT ); Sat, 7 Jan 2006 17:35:19 -0500 Received: from quechua.inka.de ([193.197.184.2]:35264 "EHLO mail.inka.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752591AbWAGWfT (ORCPT ); Sat, 7 Jan 2006 17:35:19 -0500 From: be-news06@lina.inka.de (Bernd Eckenfels) To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Almost 80% of UDP packets dropped Organization: Private Site running Debian GNU/Linux In-Reply-To: <200601071704.52833.vda@ilport.com.ua> X-Newsgroups: ka.lists.linux.kernel User-Agent: tin/1.7.8-20050315 ("Scalpay") (UNIX) (Linux/2.6.13.4 (i686)) Message-Id: Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 23:35:17 +0100 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Denis Vlasenko wrote: > UDP is connectionless. There is no way for sender to know that it must > stop sending UDP packets because receiver cannot keep up. If sender > and your network is producing and delivering UDP packets faster > than receiver can consume them, packets will be lost. Yes, but the problem of the OP sounds like the interrupt handling on mips pretty badly affects the scheduler. I guess softwareinterrupts and network polling would help here. Gruss Bernd