Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 18 Jan 2011 11:19:41 -0500
From:      John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>
To:        freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Cc:        Sergey Kandaurov <pluknet@gmail.com>, perryh@pluto.rain.com, avg@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Could MSGBUF_SIZE be made a loader tunable?
Message-ID:  <201101181119.42053.jhb@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinz8WdEc%2B9xhceEuA0UbG0m0oaokq8FQnUzOTV5@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <4cfc72a5.3nAjkv8mdrO/NrKQ%perryh@pluto.rain.com> <4d3261bc.dcI6EuBnzRqvyRnz%perryh@pluto.rain.com> <AANLkTinz8WdEc%2B9xhceEuA0UbG0m0oaokq8FQnUzOTV5@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sunday, January 16, 2011 12:24:27 pm Sergey Kandaurov wrote:
> On 16 January 2011 06:10,  <perryh@pluto.rain.com> wrote:
> > Anyone had a chance to look at this?
> >
> > http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/2010-December/060793.html
> 
> To ease testing on head I have regenerated the patch
> (against r216594):
> http://plukky.net/~pluknet/patches/msgbufsize.diff

The one hunk involving tf_rip and PS_STRINGS in amd64 looks to be unrelated.
Also, in subr_param.c, you can assume that MSGBUF_SIZE is always defined
and always assign it as the initial value rather than having an #ifdef.
Finally, I would adjust the wording in the manpage to not say that this
modifies the MSGBUF_SIZE option, but that this tunable is the same as
adjusting MSGBUF_SIZE.  Other than that I think it is fine.

-- 
John Baldwin



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201101181119.42053.jhb>