Date: Sun, 7 Jul 2002 13:14:21 -0700 From: Juli Mallett <jmallett@FreeBSD.org> To: Mike Silbersack <silby@silby.com> Cc: Alfred Perlstein <bright@mu.org>, net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: the incredible shrinking socket Message-ID: <20020707131421.A50599@FreeBSD.ORG> In-Reply-To: <20020707143846.A13771-100000@patrocles.silby.com>; from silby@silby.com on Sun, Jul 07, 2002 at 02:39:53PM -0500 References: <20020707083710.GM97638@elvis.mu.org> <20020707143846.A13771-100000@patrocles.silby.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* De: Mike Silbersack <silby@silby.com> [ Data: 2002-07-07 ] [ Subjecte: Re: the incredible shrinking socket ] > > On Sun, 7 Jul 2002, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > > > Some time ago I noticed that there appeared to be several members > > of struct socket that were either only used by listen sockets or > > only used by data sockets. > > > > I've taken a stab at unionizing the members and we wind up saving > > 28 bytes per socket on i386, and probably nearly double that on > > any 64 bit platform. That's ~15%, which isn't too shabby. > > Unions are ooogly. Would it be possible to seperate listen-only > structures out into a seperate struct instead with a pointer to it? If you're going to do that why not just end the struct with char foo[1]; And overlay the unique bits at the end? Or do we already use storage there? -- Juli Mallett <jmallett@FreeBSD.org> | FreeBSD: The Power To Serve Will break world for fulltime employment. | finger jmallett@FreeBSD.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020707131421.A50599>