From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28631 invoked by alias); 17 Aug 2004 15:39:24 -0000 Mailing-List: contact ecos-discuss-help@ecos.sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: ecos-discuss-owner@ecos.sourceware.org Received: (qmail 28623 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2004 15:39:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.wavionnetworks.com) (212.179.15.115) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 17 Aug 2004 15:39:22 -0000 Received: from srv001.wavionnetworks.com (mail [192.168.10.10]) by mail.wavionnetworks.com (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id i7HG1RkS020140; Tue, 17 Aug 2004 19:01:28 +0300 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 15:39:00 -0000 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: From: "Amir Yiron" To: , "Hao" , X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=ham version=2.63 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on mail.wavionnetworks.com Subject: RE: [ECOS] eCos + goAhead probelm X-SW-Source: 2004-08/txt/msg00265.txt.bz2 Thanks Sebastien! It works also at mine webs. Anyway, also now (with the 50ms) it's still much slower than the original socketSelect implementation (with a huge memory pool of 1.25M ..) This "Winodw's implementation" of socketSelect is slow regardless the bufsi= ze I work with (bopen). Any idea why? Thanks a lot, -- Amir -----Original Message----- From: ecos-discuss-owner@ecos.sourceware.org [mailto:ecos-discuss-owner@eco= s.sourceware.org]On Behalf Of sebastien Couret Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2004 3:53 PM To: Hao; ecos-discuss@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [ECOS] eCos + goAhead probelm Well , in files Sockgen.c and main.c , you will find a call to socketSelect= =20 (on my 2.1.7 version, it's line 563 for Sockgen.c and line 77 for main.c) ,= =20 the second argument is 1000 or 2000 (it's the timeout in milli-seconds). I= =20 suggested you to decrease this value to 50 in both files.=20 I really thing that the second implementation of socketSelect is broken and= =20 doesn't even take this timeout in account which makes it faster than the=20 first one.=20 On the other hand, I would like to inform U that I have done a epk package = of=20 a light modified version of GoAhead Version 2.1.7 (It works as a thread and= =20 has some debugging asp pages for memory leaks ).=20 I can send it to you if it helps and I will be pleased of your feedback. For increasing performance, you can also act on your library build with the= =20 configtool by removing debugging flags, gdb stubs , asserts , tracing ,=20 thread list and stack checking. I had obtain a ratio of 6 by doing this for= =20 networking benchmarks. On Tuesday 17 August 2004 15:25, Hao wrote: > Hi, sebastien, > > Thanks for your information. > I try your suggestion on my target. The problem of out of memory > disappleared!!! > The goAhead isn't crashed, but very very slowly when open a simple page. > Do you have any experience about this ? > > Hao > > >Hello All, > >In the past , (With GoAhead Webserver v 2.1.7) , I ran into the same kind > > of problem with eCos. > >After investigation this was caused by function "int socketSelect(int si= d, > >int timeout)" in file Sockgen.c (the one /* not WIN || CE || NW */ ) whi= ch > >makes calls to balloc. > >Using the another "socketSelect" (the one #if (defined (WIN) || defined > > (CE) ) solved the memory leak/overflow. May be you should try this befo= re > > modifying balloc.c . > > > >Note : Now, I use a 64K balloc buffer without any problems. > > > >Hope this helps. Have a nice day. > > > >On Tuesday 17 August 2004 06:41, Hao wrote: > >>Recently, I modify balloc() in balloc.c of goAhead. > >>I try to increase 64bytes at the line of malloc() . And the problem of > >>out of memory disappeared. > >>So , I think it's not the probelm caused by eCos. > >>I think it's caused by goAhead somewhere that call balloc() and use > >>wrong size. > >> > >>Now, in my target, goAhead still unstable just like you say. Then I use > >>very simple web page instead of default web page(home.asp). > >>It still unstable, but not crashed. > >>But it can work very fine when I use 'lynx' instead of other browser(IE, > >>mozilla..). > >>I don't know what's the difference of behavior between lynx and other > >>browser (IE,mozilla). > >> > >>Hope this information can help you something. > >> > >>Hao > >> > >>>Hello Hao! --=20 Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss -- Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss