Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 08:05:18 +0200 (SAT) From: John Hay <jhay@mikom.csir.co.za> To: dg@FreeBSD.ORG (David Greenman) Cc: cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/vm vm_kern.c Message-ID: <199806060605.IAA01513@zibbi.mikom.csir.co.za> In-Reply-To: <199806052148.OAA04751@freefall.freebsd.org> from David Greenman at "Jun 5, 98 02:48:55 pm"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> dg 1998/06/05 14:48:54 PDT > > Modified files: > sys/vm vm_kern.c > Log: > Changed the log() of "Out of mbuf clusters - increase maxusers" to a > printf() of "Out of mbuf clusters - adjust NMBCLUSTERS or increase > maxusers" so that the message is more informative and so that it will > appear in the kernel message buffer. Is it really usefull to keep a limit for mbufs and mbuf clusters? Can't we just do away with the limit and let it allocate more when it needs? At the moment if you run out of mbufs, you might see this message or the machine might just panic and after the user has figured out what happened, he will just build a new kernel with more mbufs and try again. So if we take this limit away, he won't have to go through this cycle at all. :-) I do understand that once memory is allocated to mbufs, they are there for keeps, but maybe we can even look at a mechanism to free mbufs if there are enough of them free? Actually, with all the enhancements and new mechanisms in the kernel malloc schemes, is it still necesary to manage mbufs separately from the rest? John -- John Hay -- John.Hay@mikom.csir.co.za To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199806060605.IAA01513>