[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[lwip-users] R: R: R: socket slow down
From: |
Rastislav Uhrin |
Subject: |
[lwip-users] R: R: R: socket slow down |
Date: |
Fri, 20 May 2016 15:48:05 +0200 |
Hi Jens,
Sorry, I don't understand what you are trying to say, can you please explain
more what should I do?
Thanks
-----Messaggio originale-----
Da: lwip-users [mailto:address@hidden Per conto di Jens Nielsen
Inviato: venerdì 20 maggio 2016 15:16
A: address@hidden
Oggetto: Re: [lwip-users] R: R: socket slow down
Hi
I'd say that low_level_input() reads one packet and puts it in a (chain
of) pbufs, then your ethernetif_input() hand over that packet to lwip and wait
for semaphore again.
BR /Jens
On 2016-05-20 15:09, Rastislav Uhrin wrote:
> Hi Jens,
>
> I really appreciate your help.
>
> Sorry I think that "lowlevelinput" already takes care about reading all
> packets, see here... What else could be wrong?
>
> static struct pbuf *
> low_level_input(void)
> {
> struct pbuf *p = NULL;
> struct pbuf *q;
> uint32_t len;
>
> len = XMC_ETH_MAC_GetRxFrameSize(ð_mac);
>
> #if ETH_PAD_SIZE
> len += ETH_PAD_SIZE; /* allow room for Ethernet padding */
> #endif
>
> if (len < XMC_ETH_MAC_BUF_SIZE)
> {
>
> /* We allocate a pbuf chain of pbufs from the pool. */
> p = pbuf_alloc(PBUF_RAW, len, PBUF_POOL);
>
> if (p != NULL)
> {
> #if ETH_PAD_SIZE
> pbuf_header(p, -ETH_PAD_SIZE); /* drop the padding word */
> #endif
>
> XMC_ETH_MAC_ReadFrame(ð_mac, buffer, len);
>
> len = 0;
> /* We iterate over the pbuf chain until we have read the entire
> * packet into the pbuf. */
> for (q = p; q != NULL; q = q->next)
> {
> /* Read enough bytes to fill this pbuf in the chain. The
> * available data in the pbuf is given by the q->len
> * variable.
> * This does not necessarily have to be a memcpy, you can also
> preallocate
> * pbufs for a DMA-enabled MAC and after receiving truncate it to the
> * actually received size. In this case, ensure the tot_len member
> of the
> * pbuf is the sum of the chained pbuf len members.
> */
> memcpy(q->payload, &buffer[len], q->len);
> len += q->len;
> }
>
> #if ETH_PAD_SIZE
> pbuf_header(p, ETH_PAD_SIZE); /* Reclaim the padding word */
> #endif
>
> }
> else
> {
> XMC_ETH_MAC_ReadFrame(ð_mac, NULL, 0);
> }
> }
> else
> {
> XMC_ETH_MAC_ReadFrame(ð_mac, NULL, 0);
> }
>
> return p;
> }
>
>
>
> -----Messaggio originale-----
> Da: lwip-users
> [mailto:address@hidden
> Per conto di Jens Nielsen
> Inviato: venerdì 20 maggio 2016 14:55
> A: address@hidden
> Oggetto: Re: [lwip-users] R: socket slow down
>
> Hi
>
> In your "Task waiting on semaphore" you have the exact same problem as many
> others. You wait for the semaphore and then handle only one packet, then you
> wait for semaphore again. When the semaphore is signalled you have to loop
> until all pending packets are served.
>
> I don't know your controller but if you're lucky something like this
> might be enough
>
> while(1)
> {
> sys_arch_sem_wait(ð_rx_semaphore, 0);
>
> do {
> p = low_level_input();
> if (p != NULL)
> {
> ... all the code you had here ...
> }
> } while ( p != NULL );
> }
>
>
>
> Best regards
> Jens
>
> On 2016-05-20 14:29, Rastislav Uhrin wrote:
>> Hello Jens,
>>
>> I am still on this problem.
>>
>> Yes. I have interrupt and I have semaphore. See bellow.
>>
>> But what can be wrong? How do I detect that packets are behind?
>>
>> Thanks a lot
>>
>> Rastislav
>>
>>
>> Interrupt
>> void ETH0_0_IRQHandler(void)
>> {
>> uint32_t status;
>>
>> status = XMC_ETH_MAC_GetEventStatus(ð_mac);
>>
>> if (status & XMC_ETH_MAC_EVENT_RECEIVE)
>> {
>> sys_sem_signal_isr(ð_rx_semaphore);
>> }
>>
>> XMC_ETH_MAC_ClearEventStatus(ð_mac, status);
>>
>> }
>>
>> Task waiting on semaphore
>> static void
>> ethernetif_input(void *arg)
>> {
>> struct pbuf *p = NULL;
>> struct eth_hdr *ethhdr;
>> struct netif *netif = (struct netif *)arg;
>>
>> while(1)
>> {
>> sys_arch_sem_wait(ð_rx_semaphore, 0);
>>
>> p = low_level_input();
>>
>> if (p != NULL)
>> {
>> ethhdr = p->payload;
>> switch (htons(ethhdr->type))
>> {
>> case ETHTYPE_IP:
>> case ETHTYPE_ARP:
>> /* full packet send to tcpip_thread to process */
>> if (netif->input( p, netif) != ERR_OK)
>> {
>> pbuf_free(p);
>> }
>>
>> break;
>>
>> default:
>> pbuf_free(p);
>> break;
>> }
>> }
>> }
>> }
>>
>> Input processing
>> static struct pbuf *
>> low_level_input(void)
>> {
>> struct pbuf *p = NULL;
>> struct pbuf *q;
>> uint32_t len;
>>
>> len = XMC_ETH_MAC_GetRxFrameSize(ð_mac);
>>
>> #if ETH_PAD_SIZE
>> len += ETH_PAD_SIZE; /* allow room for Ethernet padding */
>> #endif
>>
>> if (len < XMC_ETH_MAC_BUF_SIZE)
>> {
>>
>> /* We allocate a pbuf chain of pbufs from the pool. */
>> p = pbuf_alloc(PBUF_RAW, len, PBUF_POOL);
>>
>> if (p != NULL)
>> {
>> #if ETH_PAD_SIZE
>> pbuf_header(p, -ETH_PAD_SIZE); /* drop the padding word */
>> #endif
>>
>> XMC_ETH_MAC_ReadFrame(ð_mac, buffer, len);
>>
>> len = 0;
>> /* We iterate over the pbuf chain until we have read the entire
>> * packet into the pbuf. */
>> for (q = p; q != NULL; q = q->next)
>> {
>> /* Read enough bytes to fill this pbuf in the chain. The
>> * available data in the pbuf is given by the q->len
>> * variable.
>> * This does not necessarily have to be a memcpy, you can also
>> preallocate
>> * pbufs for a DMA-enabled MAC and after receiving truncate it to
>> the
>> * actually received size. In this case, ensure the tot_len member
>> of the
>> * pbuf is the sum of the chained pbuf len members.
>> */
>> memcpy(q->payload, &buffer[len], q->len);
>> len += q->len;
>> }
>>
>> #if ETH_PAD_SIZE
>> pbuf_header(p, ETH_PAD_SIZE); /* Reclaim the padding word */
>> #endif
>>
>> }
>> else
>> {
>> XMC_ETH_MAC_ReadFrame(ð_mac, NULL, 0);
>> }
>> }
>> else
>> {
>> XMC_ETH_MAC_ReadFrame(ð_mac, NULL, 0);
>> }
>>
>> return p;
>> }
>>
>> -----Messaggio originale-----
>> Da: lwip-users
>> [mailto:address@hidden
>> Per conto di Jens Nielsen
>> Inviato: mercoledì 11 maggio 2016 16:52
>> A: address@hidden
>> Oggetto: Re: [lwip-users] socket slow down
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> If you search the list you will find a lot of people with the same question,
>> it's impossible to tell where your packets are delayed without you doing
>> some analysis (traces? breakpoints?) but one thing I can say for sure is
>> that your problem is quite certainly not within lwip. A common error is to
>> assume that one packet equals one interrupt which equals one signalled
>> semaphore which equals one processed packet, whenever you receive a second
>> packet before the previous is processed you'll be "one packet behind" and
>> experience delays like you describe.
>> Where did you get your driver?
>>
>> Best regards
>> Jens
>>
>>
>> On 2016-05-11 12:42, Rastislav Uhrin wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I need advice and help on one issue with lwip stack version 1.4.1. I
>>> am new to this stack and to networking in general. Nevertheless I
>>> have integrated it to application on Infineon xmc processor together
>>> with FreeRTOS.
>>>
>>> Looking on many different examples on the internet and many trial
>>> and error. I am using netconn sockets. Application works!
>>>
>>> The only problem is that after some time, better say after
>>> exchanging several 10-100 packets of different sizes, response gets
>>> slow. From 2ms down to 2-3seconds. It still works but slow. Same if I use
>>> ping.
>>>
>>> I tried all possible setting of lwip options but of course since I
>>> don't have deep insight of what they influence I was not able to
>>> improve this behavior.
>>>
>>> I would appreciate if you can give me a hint what could be wrong,
>>> what could I check, how to proceed to debug this strange behavior.
>>>
>>> I tried also new version 2.0 of stack but behavior is same.
>>>
>>> rum
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> lwip-users mailing list
>>> address@hidden
>>> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users
>> _______________________________________________
>> lwip-users mailing list
>> address@hidden
>> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> lwip-users mailing list
>> address@hidden
>> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users
>
> _______________________________________________
> lwip-users mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users
>
> _______________________________________________
> lwip-users mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users
_______________________________________________
lwip-users mailing list
address@hidden
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users
- [lwip-users] socket slow down, Rastislav Uhrin, 2016/05/11
- Re: [lwip-users] socket slow down, Jens Nielsen, 2016/05/11
- [lwip-users] R: socket slow down, Rastislav Uhrin, 2016/05/11
- [lwip-users] R: socket slow down, Rastislav Uhrin, 2016/05/20
- [lwip-users] R: socket slow down, Rastislav Uhrin, 2016/05/20
- Re: [lwip-users] R: socket slow down, Jens Nielsen, 2016/05/20
- [lwip-users] R: R: socket slow down, Rastislav Uhrin, 2016/05/20
- Re: [lwip-users] R: R: socket slow down, Jens Nielsen, 2016/05/20
- [lwip-users] R: R: R: socket slow down,
Rastislav Uhrin <=
- Re: [lwip-users] R: R: R: socket slow down, Jens Nielsen, 2016/05/20
- [lwip-users] R: R: R: R: socket slow down, Rastislav Uhrin, 2016/05/20
- Re: [lwip-users] R: R: R: R: socket slow down, Noam Weissman, 2016/05/20
- Re: [lwip-users] R: R: R: R: socket slow down, Jens Nielsen, 2016/05/20