On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 10:51 AM, christian pellegrin <[email protected]>wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 6:35 PM, christian pellegrin <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > I can do it and have a separate patch om my site if someone needs the > > OSM. Paul told me that his user-case is that he doesn't want to have > > the mcp2515 trying to resend the packet for many times if no one is > > responding. I can see the problem: when this happens also other > > packets are stalled on the tx queue. I could implement the use of all > > hmmm perhaps I said a really stupid thing. If there is no acknowledge > evidently there are 0 nodes on the bus or the bus is fucked-up. So > it's not a problem if all the queue is stalled till there is something > alive on the bus. > > > -- > Christian Pellegrin, see http://www.evolware.org/chri/ > "Real Programmers don't play tennis, or any other sport which requires > you to change clothes. Mountain climbing is OK, and Real Programmers > wear their climbing boots to work in case a mountain should suddenly > spring up in the middle of the computer room." > Yes, I had originally thought osm was needed because when I watched an open bus. I would see continuous traffic after a send. I didn't want to get into a situation where if one of 4 nodes died the retries to the dead node ate up the whole bus, but that's NOT what I see. As long as there is 1 good node, a packet to a non-existent node is not retried. thanks, Paul
_______________________________________________ Socketcan-core mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/socketcan-core
