site_archiver@lists.apple.com Delivered-To: darwin-kernel@lists.apple.com On Wed, 2008-08-20, at 17:58, Markus Hanauska wrote: for (i = 0; i <= max; i++) { // ... some code left out ... result = ctl_enqueuedata( ctlref, unit, &packed, sizeof(packed), i < max ? CTL_DATA_NOWAKEUP : CTL_DATA_EOR ); // ... some code left out ... } The code works as expected when always sending this flag: result = ctl_enqueuedata( ctlref, unit, &packed, sizeof(packed), i < max ? (CTL_DATA_NOWAKEUP | CTL_DATA_EOR) : CTL_DATA_EOR ); -- Best Regards, Markus Hanauska _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Darwin-kernel mailing list (Darwin-kernel@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/darwin-kernel/site_archiver%40lists.a... Ah, okay, after reading some more kernel source, I found the problem myself. The problem is not with the wake-up flag itself, but with the CTL_DATA_EOR flag. The rather minimal documentation you can find online and in the H-file kinda implies that this flag is not even used (the documentation for ctl_enqueuedata mentions that the no-wake- up flag is the only useful flag, so I thought that wether I use CTL_DATA_EOR or not makes no difference in the first place; not true. This flag decides if the next enqueued mbufs belong to the same packet or form a packet of their own. That's it. 10.3.9 didn't even know such a flag, so I paid too little attention to it. This email sent to site_archiver@lists.apple.com