From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Aug 26 05:42:43 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 8B8B716A4CE; Thu, 26 Aug 2004 05:42:43 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [212.242.86.163])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id DD8A543D53; Thu, 26 Aug 2004 05:42:40 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by critter.freebsd.dk (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id i7Q5gWaL051891;
	Thu, 26 Aug 2004 07:42:40 +0200 (CEST)
	(envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk)
To: Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org>
From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 25 Aug 2004 23:33:55 MDT."
             <412D7643.9000700@samsco.org> 
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 07:42:32 +0200
Message-ID: <51890.1093498952@critter.freebsd.dk>
Sender: phk@critter.freebsd.dk
cc: Matthew Jacob <mjacob44@yahoo.com>
cc: sos@freebsd.org
cc: Scott Long <scottl@freebsd.org>
cc: arch@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: potential re change for 5.3? 
X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture
	<freebsd-arch.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 05:42:43 -0000

In message <412D7643.9000700@samsco.org>, Scott Long writes:

>> Well, the problem here is that requests which cannot be dealt with
>> due to resource shortages should be queued at the level where they
>> require least resources.  A request queued inside a driver holds
>> far more resources than a request in the pure bio format at the
>> entrance to the driver for instance.
>
>Not necessarily.  It's not hard for a driver to keep a request queued on
>the bioq and not consume and driver resources at all.

Again it comes down to skill level of the driver writer, and no offense
to present company, I'd rather just make sure it's very hard to be
lazy in that context.

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.