Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 23:02:55 -0700 From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@mu.org> To: "Kenneth D. Merry" <ken@kdm.org> Cc: current@FreeBSD.org, net@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: new zero copy sockets patches available Message-ID: <20020518060255.GN20683@elvis.mu.org> In-Reply-To: <20020517233950.A36169@panzer.kdm.org> References: <20020517233950.A36169@panzer.kdm.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Kenneth D. Merry <ken@kdm.org> [020517 22:40] wrote: > > I have released a new set of zero copy sockets patches, against -current > from today (May 17th, 2002). > > The main change is to deal with the vfs_ioopt changes that Alan Cox made in > kern_subr.c. (They conflicted a bit with the zero copy receive code.) > > The patches and the FAQ are available here: > > http://people.freebsd.org/~ken/zero_copy/ > > Comments, questions and reviews are all welcome! jumbo_vm_init() has a bunch of bugs first it doesn't work right if called concurrently. you need to protect the initialization of jumbo_vm_object otherwise bad things can happen. my suggestion is to store the results of vm_object_allocate into a temporary, grab the mutex and then check to see if jumbo_vm_object has been initialized again if it has then free the object, otherwise store the allocated object into the global and continue. you may not call malloc(9) with M_WAITOK while holding a mutex. --- entry = jumbo_kmap_inuse.slh_first; I'm sure that should use a list macro. --- That's all I see off the bat. :) Looks cool though. -- -Alfred Perlstein [alfred@freebsd.org] 'Instead of asking why a piece of software is using "1970s technology," start asking why software is ignoring 30 years of accumulated wisdom.' Tax deductible donations for FreeBSD: http://www.freebsdfoundation.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020518060255.GN20683>