From owner-freebsd-arch Mon Aug 28 11: 8:53 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from whistle.com (s205m131.whistle.com [207.76.205.131]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01D7B37B43C; Mon, 28 Aug 2000 11:08:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from smap@localhost) by whistle.com (8.10.0/8.10.0) id e7SI8ph05639; Mon, 28 Aug 2000 11:08:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bubba.whistle.com( 207.76.205.7) by whistle.com via smap (V2.0) id xma005637; Mon, 28 Aug 2000 11:08:37 -0700 Received: (from archie@localhost) by bubba.whistle.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA70096; Mon, 28 Aug 2000 11:08:37 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from archie) From: Archie Cobbs Message-Id: <200008281808.LAA70096@bubba.whistle.com> Subject: Re: Proposal to clarify mbuf handling rules (fwd) In-Reply-To: "from Robert Watson at Aug 28, 2000 01:46:56 pm" To: Robert Watson Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 11:08:37 -0700 (PDT) Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL82 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Robert Watson writes: > It might be worth taking another look at the IOLite work, as although it > changes the API, it has a fairly organized book keeping mechanism to track > readable/writable mbufs, do copy-on-write, etc, etc. The code may not be > immediately usable, but might give some ideas about how to handle this > kind of thing, and under what conditions packets will or won't need > modification during processing. Got an URL? > One area that worries me in particular is the ipfw code in relation to the > bridging code: the ipfw code assumes it can pullup the packet to get a > contiguous IP header; however, callers may not necessarily like that. I don't see the problem.. can you explain? > Similarly, issues of packet freeing: I'd rather see IP filtering code > return "yay" or "nay" on the packet, and allow the caller to free it if > they see fit. Another symetric mbuf handling issue, where calling > conventions aren't well-defined. Yes, that would be an improvement as well. -Archie ___________________________________________________________________________ Archie Cobbs * Whistle Communications, Inc. * http://www.whistle.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message