From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jul 30 15:00:42 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63C7F37B405 for ; Wed, 30 Jul 2003 15:00:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay.pair.com (relay.pair.com [209.68.1.20]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8560243FCB for ; Wed, 30 Jul 2003 15:00:39 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from silby@silby.com) Received: (qmail 62003 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2003 22:00:38 -0000 Received: from niwun.pair.com (HELO localhost) (209.68.2.70) by relay.pair.com with SMTP; 30 Jul 2003 22:00:38 -0000 X-pair-Authenticated: 209.68.2.70 Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2003 16:59:48 -0500 (CDT) From: Mike Silbersack To: Pierre Beyssac In-Reply-To: <20030730215538.GA1672@fasterix.frmug.org> Message-ID: <20030730165830.L88169@odysseus.silby.com> References: <20030730213249.GA900@fasterix.frmug.org> <20030730215538.GA1672@fasterix.frmug.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: bug in big pipe code causing performance problems X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2003 22:00:42 -0000 On Wed, 30 Jul 2003, Pierre Beyssac wrote: > On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 11:32:49PM +0200, Pierre Beyssac wrote: > > - if (space > 0 && (wpipe->pipe_buffer.cnt < PIPE_SIZE)) { > > + if (space > 0 > > + && wpipe->pipe_buffer.cnt < wpipe->pipe_buffer.size) { > > PS : not-so-obvious after all since the above is equivalent to > "(space > 0)" by itself, so I won't commit the above as is, and the > real fix might be something more complicated... > -- > Pierre Beyssac pb@fasterix.frmug.org pb@fasterix.freenix.org > Free domains: http://www.eu.org/ or mail dns-manager@EU.org Good timing. :) I was just writing a reply which stated that (space > 0) would be sufficient. However, as you point out, there might be something subtle lurking around. I'll do some doublechecking tonight and get back to you. Mike "Silby" Silbersack