On 5/4/19 4:53 am, Matthew J Fletcher wrote: > Hi Sebastian > > I used rtems_task_wake_after(). > > > On Thu, 4 Apr 2019, 18:22 Sebastian Huber, <sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de > <mailto:sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de>> wrote: > > How do you wait. Is this a busy wait? > > ----- Matthew J Fletcher <ami...@gmail.com <mailto:ami...@gmail.com>> > schrieb: > > replying to myself. > > > > With a 1 second pause between socket() and close() and 512 sockets it > will > > still ENOBUFS,.. without calculating it properly thats easily 10 minutes > > since the first socket was allocated,. that must be enough time to start > > freeing the socket buffers internally. > > > > > > On Thu, 4 Apr 2019 at 16:47, Matthew J Fletcher <ami...@gmail.com > <mailto:ami...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > I have noticed an issue with lib-bsd that the legacy stack does not > have. > > > > > > If have a loop that does > > > > > > for (;;) > > > { > > > wait(100) // milliseconds > > > socket() // allocate > > > close() // free > > > }
Are you able to make a small stand alone test? Thanks Chris _______________________________________________ users mailing list users@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/users
