Subject: Re: sctp_peeloff()

From: Michael Tuexen <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 13:23:11 +0100

Hi Xiaoan,

even if the other thread reads the messages for stream 1 the rwnd can 
not
be grown. So you are in the deadlock situation even in the case were
almost all messages are read.

Best regards
Michael

On Dec 10, 2003, at 10:44 PM, Xiaodan Tang wrote:

> I would expect this could be an application error. It should always 
> have other threads waiting on other stream.  If you are single thread 
> application, you should never call
> stream specific sctp_recvmsg()?
>
> Regards
> -Xiaodan
>
> Michael Tuexen wrote:
>
>> The is the same problem: You call a blocking sctp_recvmsg for stream 
>> 0.
>> You get/have a lot of messages for stream 1 which fill up the receiver
>> window. Now you are in a deadlock situation.
>> The only way is on the receiving side accept the user data with the 
>> lowest TSN involved.
>>
>> Best regards
>> Michael
>>
>> On Dec 10, 2003, at 5:56 PM, Xiaodan Tang wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Instead of "peel_off()" a stream, how about allow sctp_rcvmsg() to 
>>> be able to
>>> receive from a perticular steam_id ?  As of now, we can 
>>> sctp_sendmsg()
>>>
>>
>>
>>> to a
>>> specefic stream, but not receive on it.
>>>
>>> -xtang
>>>
>
>