From owner-freebsd-net  Sat Sep 23 15:35:51 2000
Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Received: from berserker.bsdi.com (berserker.twistedbit.com [199.79.183.1])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 8688E37B42C; Sat, 23 Sep 2000 15:35:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from berserker.bsdi.com (cp@LOCALHOST [127.0.0.1])
	by berserker.bsdi.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA19401;
	Sat, 23 Sep 2000 16:35:27 -0600 (MDT)
Message-Id: <200009232235.QAA19401@berserker.bsdi.com>
To: Bosko Milekic <bmilekic@technokratis.com>
Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: mbuf system and SMPng 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 23 Sep 2000 14:46:44 EDT."
             <Pine.BSF.4.21.0009231425080.7679-100000@jehovah.technokratis.com> 
From: Chuck Paterson <cp@bsdi.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 16:35:27 -0600
Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org

}
}	Actually, MBWAKEUP() first makes sure to check m_mballoc_wid, and
}  does so with the lock held, so it will not call wakeup_one() if nobody is
}  sleeping. Note that MBWAKEUP() is always called with the necessary mutex
}  held (whether it be the mclfree or mmbfree one).
}

Right, you are. When you change the this it looks like you can also get
rid of the atomic op in MBWAKEUP.

Chuck



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message