Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 01:00:10 -0800 From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net> To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> Cc: "Kenneth D. Merry" <ken@kdm.org>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: sbufs in userland Message-ID: <20010226010010.Z8663@fw.wintelcom.net> In-Reply-To: <18974.983175906@critter>; from phk@critter.freebsd.dk on Mon, Feb 26, 2001 at 09:25:06AM %2B0100 References: <20010226003319.A19994@panzer.kdm.org> <18974.983175906@critter>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> [010226 00:25] wrote: > In message <20010226003319.A19994@panzer.kdm.org>, "Kenneth D. Merry" writes: > > >1. Should we put sbufs in userland? > > Yes. > > >2. If we do put sbufs in userland, what is the best way to do it? > > There are three different ways I can think of: > > I think that libsbuf makes sense. Since sbuf was your idea, I'm wondering why you didn't make the allocation/init of sbufs not possibly require knowledge of the sbuf internal layout. Meaning sbuf_new() should return a struct sbuf * such that one can pass NULL in and get a pointer back without having to know the sbuf internals. Is it too late, impossible or not feasable to fix this? -- -Alfred Perlstein - [bright@wintelcom.net|alfred@freebsd.org] To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010226010010.Z8663>