X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2010 11:18:56 +0100 From: Corinna Vinschen To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: ioctl() on socket fd's take 3 seconds on 1.7.7 Message-ID: <20101123101856.GA18309@calimero.vinschen.de> Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com References: <20101115162242 DOT GF17405 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <4CE8046F DOT 2090106 AT arcor DOT de> <20101122131729 DOT GT18309 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com On Nov 22 21:29, Jason Curl wrote: > The actual delays are caused by SendARP() called from get_xp_ifs(). > Interestingly enough, it isn't always slow, only sometimes. > [...] First of all, thanks for looking deeper into this. > And the interface that is failing: D4B7FEA9 = 169.254.183.212 > doesn't appear by a call to "ipconfig /all". I'm guessing that > Windows is actually making a network request for this non-existent > interface. > > ./Windows/v5.0/Include/WinError.h:#define ERROR_BAD_NET_NAME 67L > > ERROR_BAD_NET_NAME > "The network name cannot be found. This error is returned on Windows > Vista and later when an ARP reply to the SendARP request was not > received. This error occurs if the destination IPv4 address could > not be reached." > > I'm not sure where this IP is currently coming from... This autoconfig address is returned by GetAdapterAddresses so it has been configured at one point, even if the interface is not visible. Ok, so SendARP is kind of a problematic call. As you can see from the source code, it's only called to set the IFF_NOARP flag. Probably that's a bit over the top. What about just disabling this code? Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple