Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2012 14:43:09 -0700 From: Matthew Jacob <mj@feral.com> To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: BUFSIZ = 1024, still ? Message-ID: <50300C6D.3030501@feral.com> In-Reply-To: <6882.1345325806@critter.freebsd.dk> References: <6882.1345325806@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 8/18/2012 2:36 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > In message <50300540.9060906@feral.com>, Matthew Jacob writes: > >> [...] that there might be a measurable >> difference for having to copy 4K (unaligned) than 1K (unaligned) to >> kernel space for disposition. > Actually, as far as I'm aware, the 4K would be page-aligned by > default due to our malloc(3) implementation. > >> Wasn't there just a recent discussion about running 1.x binaries? > 1.x binaries wouldn't notice and wouldn't be able to tell > if BUFSIZ is different in 10.x I wasn't concerned about those specifically- I was just using this as an example of leaving stuff alone. >> If you're going to talk about making a change to defaults, the default >> MAXPHYS and DLFTPHYS have been undersized for years now. > Indeed, but as I understand it, those require device driver changes ? Ah, well 10.X would be an ideal time to find out!
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?50300C6D.3030501>