From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG  Sat Nov 30 08:50:58 2013
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 38696AA5;
 Sat, 30 Nov 2013 08:50:58 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-n.franken.de (drew.ipv6.franken.de
 [IPv6:2001:638:a02:a001:20e:cff:fe4a:feaa])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BDE2813BC;
 Sat, 30 Nov 2013 08:50:57 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [192.168.1.102] (p508F1AF6.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [80.143.26.246])
 (Authenticated sender: macmic)
 by mail-n.franken.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDC081C0C0692;
 Sat, 30 Nov 2013 09:50:54 +0100 (CET)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\))
Subject: Re: ip_output()/if_output() behaviour
From: Michael Tuexen <Michael.Tuexen@lurchi.franken.de>
In-Reply-To: <CAJ-VmonJijEvrftE6SfUrK7vONXOAY62usik7mFfzo9zHmqt0g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2013 09:50:55 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <41906339-8AE7-4444-8B84-6FC19D48B132@lurchi.franken.de>
References: <BF7B04F7-0D45-4708-99A8-8BE030109CEC@lurchi.franken.de>
 <CAJ-Vmo=Jsf=7uXxwJ=Md5KLFpvSYAcaaNrq+bHsw75nfSG_ZaQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <B7E3AA58-172A-4D20-B625-95C4712D46E7@lurchi.franken.de>
 <52987E27.10503@freebsd.org>
 <8C291076-5F03-4406-B689-A3185E6DD313@lurchi.franken.de>
 <5298BD5D.3020203@freebsd.org>
 <CAJ-VmonJijEvrftE6SfUrK7vONXOAY62usik7mFfzo9zHmqt0g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1510)
Cc: "freebsd-net@freebsd.org list" <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.16
Precedence: list
List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD <freebsd-net.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-net>,
 <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
 <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2013 08:50:58 -0000

On Nov 29, 2013, at 11:39 PM, Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> wrote:

> +1
> 
> 
> On 29 November 2013 08:14, Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org> wrote:
> 
>>> ifnet(9) says:
>>> 
>>>            if_transmit()
>>>            Transmit a packet on an interface or queue it if the interface
>>> is
>>>            in use.  This function will return ENOBUFS if the devices
>>> software
>>>            and hardware queues are both full.  ...
>>> 
>>> So I guess returning ENOBUFS when the packet was queued is wrong...
>> 
>> I think it is.
>> 
>> ENOBUFS means "I couldn't proceed due to no buffers"
>> not "I used up the last one on this operation".
> 
> Yes, it's wrong. ENOBUFS means "couldn't queue; no buffers." Please
> provide a diff against igb and I'll make sure Jack/Intel get it into
> (his, freebsd) tree.
I sent the patch already yesterday to the list and Jack. It covers
em, igb and ixgbe.

Best regards
Michael
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> 
> 
> -adrian
>