From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Dec 6 05:25:19 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1A631065694 for ; Mon, 6 Dec 2010 05:25:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from perryh@pluto.rain.com) Received: from agora.rdrop.com (agora.rdrop.com [IPv6:2607:f678:1010::34]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D244F8FC18 for ; Mon, 6 Dec 2010 05:25:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from agora.rdrop.com (66@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.13.1/8.12.7) with ESMTP id oB65PJGd017940 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Sun, 5 Dec 2010 21:25:19 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from perryh@pluto.rain.com) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by agora.rdrop.com (8.13.1/8.12.9/Submit) with UUCP id oB65PJ6J017939 for freebsd-stable@freebsd.org; Sun, 5 Dec 2010 21:25:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from fbsd61 by pluto.rain.com (4.1/SMI-4.1-pluto-M2060407) id AA03518; Sun, 5 Dec 10 21:20:35 PST Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2010 21:20:37 -0800 From: perryh@pluto.rain.com To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Message-Id: <4cfc72a5.3nAjkv8mdrO/NrKQ%perryh@pluto.rain.com> User-Agent: nail 11.25 7/29/05 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Could MSGBUF_SIZE be made a loader tunable? X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2010 05:25:20 -0000 Would there be some fundamental problem in changing MSGBUF_SIZE from a compiled-in constant to a tunable that could be set at the loader prompt? (I'm _not_ suggesting that it be adjustable while the system is running.) The upside would be that, if someone needed a larger buffer temporarily to accommodate trace data from a mechanism such as kern.geom.debugflags, the size could be adjusted without having to rebuild the kernel. I didn't see any obvious downside from examining the 8.1-RELEASE code, but I could certainly have overlooked some subtle (or even blatant) reason why this would be a Bad Idea.