Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 10:56:52 -0700 From: Sam Leffler <sam@errno.com> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Cc: Bosko Milekic <bmilekic@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: [HEADS-UP] mbuma is in the tree Message-ID: <200406021056.53005.sam@errno.com> In-Reply-To: <20040602094940.GA80394@cell.sick.ru> References: <20040531215101.GA60299@freefall.freebsd.org> <20040602094940.GA80394@cell.sick.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wednesday 02 June 2004 02:49 am, Gleb Smirnoff wrote: > Bosko, > > On Mon, May 31, 2004 at 02:51:01PM -0700, Bosko Milekic wrote: > B> mbuma is an Mbuf & Cluster allocator built on top of a number of > B> extensions to the UMA framework, all included herein. > > are you going to convert mbuf tag allocator to UMA? Now > tags are allocated with malloc(). AFAIK, tags are used heavily in pf, > and forthcoming ALTQ. Moving to UMA should affect their performance > positively. You probably meant you wanted to use a UMA zone. m_tag's can already be allocated using this mechanism. I did it once for vlan tags but botched it (didn't handle module references properly) so backed it. But there's no reason someone cannot redo it or convert other heavily used fixed size tags to use a zone. Sam
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200406021056.53005.sam>