Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 18:22:36 -0800 From: David Greenman <dg@root.com> To: mjacob@feral.com Cc: Andrew Gallatin <gallatin@cs.duke.edu>, Bosko Milekic <bmilekic@technokratis.com>, "Kenneth D. Merry" <ken@kdm.org>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG, alfred@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: zero copy code review Message-ID: <200012020222.SAA14753@implode.root.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 01 Dec 2000 18:06:22 PST." <Pine.BSF.4.21.0012011805210.46782-100000@beppo.feral.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> >> Yes, that's always been my assumption too. That's why I never noticed >> >> it... >> > >> >IIRC, this has never been guaranteed. It's often unlikely that a request can't >> >be satisfied after a sleep with the current code. >> >> FreeBSD blocked indefinitly and never returned a NULL pointer. > >Smells like livelock somewhere here, but has it changed recently as has been >asserted? Huh? No, the process allocating the memory blocks waiting for memory. If memory never becomes available, then the process never wakes up, but this is NOT a livelock. -DG David Greenman Co-founder, The FreeBSD Project - http://www.freebsd.org President, TeraSolutions, Inc. - http://www.terasolutions.com Pave the road of life with opportunities. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200012020222.SAA14753>