From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu May  1 05:35:28 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C41B37B401
	for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Thu,  1 May 2003 05:35:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rms21.rommon.net (rms21.rommon.net [193.64.42.200])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF83F43F93
	for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Thu,  1 May 2003 05:35:26 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from pete@he.iki.fi)
Received: from PHE (h93.vuokselantie10.fi [193.64.42.147])
	by rms21.rommon.net (8.12.6p2/8.12.6) with SMTP id h41CZLiZ062165;
	Thu, 1 May 2003 15:35:22 +0300 (EEST)
	(envelope-from pete@he.iki.fi)
Message-ID: <003901c30fde$37f2a0f0$932a40c1@PHE>
From: "Petri Helenius" <pete@he.iki.fi>
To: "Luigi Rizzo" <rizzo@icir.org>,
	"Mike Silbersack" <silby@silby.com>
References: <20030430142532.F3741@odysseus.silby.com>
	<20030501041210.A3514@xorpc.icir.org>
Date: Thu, 1 May 2003 15:35:56 +0300
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Review needed: Mbuf double-free detection patch
X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD <freebsd-net.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 May 2003 12:35:28 -0000

> 
> [on a side note, it is a bit depressing to see the same
> code replicated twice, in m_free() and m_freem(). Couldn't
> one try to make m_freem() just call m_free() in a loop and
> save some code bloat ? I doubt the extra function call
> would harm performance too much.]
> 
Allocating / freeing mbufs is quite expensive already so it probably does not make 
that huge a difference. However the direction should be to improve the perfomance.

Pete