Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 25 Nov 2002 13:39:02 -0500 (EST)
From:      Andrew Gallatin <gallatin@cs.duke.edu>
To:        Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@icir.org>
Cc:        Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org>, current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: mbuf header bloat ?
Message-ID:  <15842.28230.205720.313119@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu>
In-Reply-To: <20021125094815.F20370@xorpc.icir.org>
References:  <15840.8629.324788.887872@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1021125111737.36232C-100000@fledge.watson.org> <20021125094815.F20370@xorpc.icir.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

Luigi Rizzo writes:
 > The mbuf bloat has two aspects -- first it does have some cost to
 > initialize and reset all these extra fields (and it is bug prone --
 > witness is the missing cleanup in m_getcl(), because m-tags were
 > introduced after m_getcl() and probably it was forgotten); second,
 > a legitimate question might arise at some point on why some features
 > deserve to go there and others don't, and unfortunately the mac label
 > constitutes a very bad precedent because it is very large and not very
 > widely used (at list now) thus failing the two main important criteria
 > for selection what should be in and what should not.

Well said.

Drew

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




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?15842.28230.205720.313119>