From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Feb  7 16:08:34 2014
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 105A12CF
 for <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>; Fri,  7 Feb 2014 16:08:34 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED8891CAF
 for <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>; Fri,  7 Feb 2014 16:08:33 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from Alfreds-MacBook-Pro-9.local (c-76-21-10-192.hsd1.ca.comcast.net
 [76.21.10.192]) by elvis.mu.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2BFF21A3C19
 for <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>; Fri,  7 Feb 2014 08:08:30 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <52F50501.8080708@mu.org>
Date: Fri, 07 Feb 2014 08:08:33 -0800
From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@mu.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7;
 rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: mbuf and uio
References: <CAKoxK+6JpQT9F_2Vt8Zxk1A4ajYx3D-j2G5qdeXsA4Lg3YJC8g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAKoxK+6JpQT9F_2Vt8Zxk1A4ajYx3D-j2G5qdeXsA4Lg3YJC8g@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture <freebsd-arch.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-arch>,
 <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
 <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Feb 2014 16:08:34 -0000

On 2/7/14 4:51 AM, Luca Ferrari wrote:
> Hi all,
> I'm just wondering why mbufs seems to be much more important from an
> administrator point of view than uio. I mean, both structures are used
> to move data thru a stack (network or i/o), but the mbufs get
> accounted by serveral tools (like netstat and so on) while uio does
> not.
> Am I totally wrong on this?
uios are transient structures that can be allocated on the stack at any 
time.  In general you'll have at most 1 uio per process/thread active.

tracking them would not really gain us much.

-- 
Alfred Perlstein