Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 00:21:47 -0500 (CDT) From: Mike Silbersack <silby@silby.com> To: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@FreeBSD.org> Cc: rwatson@freebsd.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, Ruslan Ermilov <ru@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, cvs-src@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/netinet in_pcb.c tcp_subr.c tcp_timer.c tcp_var.h Message-ID: <20060912001916.S43498@odysseus.silby.com> In-Reply-To: <20060911142703.GF27667@FreeBSD.org> References: <200609061356.k86DuZ0w016069@repoman.freebsd.org> <20060906091204.B6691@odysseus.silby.com> <20060906143204.GQ40020@FreeBSD.org> <20060906093553.L6691@odysseus.silby.com> <20060906150506.GA7069@rambler-co.ru> <20060911005435.A23530@odysseus.silby.com> <20060911142703.GF27667@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 11 Sep 2006, Gleb Smirnoff wrote: > The UMA zone can't be made smaller than it is, while IP port ranges > can vary in both directions. Hm, it can't be made smaller because we're using UMA_ZONE_NOFREE... why are we using that? Shouldn't locking handle that, rwatson? :) > I think that your original commit should be rethought. It should free one > tcptw entry, in a case of absolute match, and return NULL. Do not jump > up and go on into cycle again. In order to do that, it has to know if the tcptw entry is one that will be useful for the upcoming connection. It might have to scan through many entries before it comes upon an entry, as your tests proved. It's still going to perform poorly in certain circumstances. Mike "Silby" Silbersack
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060912001916.S43498>