From owner-freebsd-net Wed Oct 2 13:18:42 2002 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 513C537B401 for ; Wed, 2 Oct 2002 13:18:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [204.156.12.50]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 643A243E75 for ; Wed, 2 Oct 2002 13:18:40 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from robert@fledge.watson.org) Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.pr.watson.org [192.0.2.3]) by fledge.watson.org (8.12.4/8.12.4) with SMTP id g92KICOo050378; Wed, 2 Oct 2002 16:18:12 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from robert@fledge.watson.org) Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 16:18:11 -0400 (EDT) From: Robert Watson X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org To: Garrett Wollman Cc: net@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: NFS client code calls sosend() directly... In-Reply-To: <200210021947.g92Jlu4D000913@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Wed, 2 Oct 2002, Garrett Wollman wrote: > < said: > > > protocols have the option of implementing pru_sosend() using the central > > sosend(), or providing their own optimized implementation. However, the > > exception to this appears to be in the nfsclient code, where sosend is > > invoked directly on the socket: > > The NFS code is hairy and evil and since I don't use it I didn't want to > touch it when I made that change several years ago. I guess my question then is: I'd like to clean this up. Is the approach I'm suggesting correct? Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Projects robert@fledge.watson.org Network Associates Laboratories To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message