From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org  Mon Nov  9 15:25:25 2015
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
Delivered-To: freebsd-net@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E63DA2ACFF
 for <freebsd-net@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org>;
 Mon,  9 Nov 2015 15:25:25 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from daemon-user@freebsd.org)
Received: from phabric-backend.isc.freebsd.org
 (phabric-backend.isc.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:3:ffe0:406a:0:50:2])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7914C1A03
 for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Mon,  9 Nov 2015 15:25:25 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from daemon-user@freebsd.org)
Received: by phabric-backend.isc.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1346)
 id 75873148BED; Mon,  9 Nov 2015 15:25:25 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2015 15:25:25 +0000
To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
From: "rrs (Randall Stewart)" <phabric-noreply@FreeBSD.org>
Reply-to: D1809+325+4e42c88dbf8c3b72@reviews.freebsd.org
Subject: [Differential] [Updated] D1809: [sockbuf] Don't expose lock details
 when isn't needed
Message-ID: <5042a78761f5bc3b6b22c169406e64b2@localhost.localdomain>
X-Priority: 3
X-Phabricator-Sent-This-Message: Yes
X-Mail-Transport-Agent: MetaMTA
X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All
X-Phabricator-Mail-Tags: <differential-reviewers>, <differential-comment>
Thread-Topic: D1809: [sockbuf] Don't expose lock details when isn't needed
X-Herald-Rules: none
X-Phabricator-To: <PHID-USER-ejmjsmhpyau7otpbjnc6>
X-Phabricator-To: <PHID-USER-22avn2hssqzufmcg2crf>
X-Phabricator-To: <PHID-USER-mqlw6f5jjiqhbs4co7yd>
X-Phabricator-To: <PHID-USER-s22ldiy33wseno7vfmzs>
X-Phabricator-To: <PHID-USER-xs5piezwnsa6epounp3t>
X-Phabricator-To: <PHID-USER-nb2boxugvmpo7syia5md>
X-Phabricator-Cc: <PHID-USER-mhzsgq7klbzjcspjzvus>
X-Phabricator-Cc: <PHID-USER-dyyyzfp34mimhzvg33tk>
Precedence: bulk
In-Reply-To: <differential-rev-PHID-DREV-itcsjouioqxprcrqy7hw-req@FreeBSD.org>
References: <differential-rev-PHID-DREV-itcsjouioqxprcrqy7hw-req@FreeBSD.org>
Thread-Index: ZDUyNzQ5ZWQxMTRmZDFiNGM0NTM4Yzk5MDEwIFZAuuU=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20
List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD <freebsd-net.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-net>,
 <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
 <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2015 15:25:25 -0000

rrs added a comment.


  The socket buffer with SCTP is just not something thats workable. There are
  all sorts of pre-defined notions that closely align a socket buffer to stream-of-bytes
  semantics of TCP. With UDP its never an issue, since you have all un-ordered who
  cares up come the messages.
  
  With SCTP there are all sorts of interesting ordering constraints and settings that
  make it so that you can't just read from a linear socket buffer.
  
  We definitely would need a completely different abstraction!

REVISION DETAIL
  https://reviews.freebsd.org/D1809

EMAIL PREFERENCES
  https://reviews.freebsd.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/

To: davide, kmacy, np, lstewart, rwatson, rrs
Cc: julian, freebsd-net-list