From owner-freebsd-net Sat Jul 29 16:13:34 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mail-out1.apple.com (mail-out1.apple.com [17.254.0.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4969637B621 for ; Sat, 29 Jul 2000 16:13:32 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from justin@apple.com) Received: from mailgate1.apple.com (A17-128-100-225.apple.com [17.128.100.225]) by mail-out1.apple.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA13967 for ; Sat, 29 Jul 2000 16:13:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from scv2.apple.com (scv2.apple.com) by mailgate1.apple.com (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.1.5) with ESMTP id for ; Sat, 29 Jul 2000 16:13:31 -0700 Received: from grinch ([17.219.158.67]) by scv2.apple.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id QAA29140 for ; Sat, 29 Jul 2000 16:13:23 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200007292313.QAA29140@scv2.apple.com> To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: sub-optimal tcp_ouput() performance in the face of ENOBUFS Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 16:14:25 -0700 From: "Justin C. Walker" Reply-To: justin@apple.com x-mailer: Apple Mail (2.317) Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Saturday, July 29, 2000, at 01:46 PM, Mike Silbersack wrote: > > On Sat, 29 Jul 2000, Justin C. Walker wrote: > > > On Saturday, July 29, 2000, at 10:56 AM, Mike Silbersack wrote: > > [snip] > Yep, you're correct. I must've been tired when I grepped last night. > > Do you guys handle ip_output returning ENOBUFS any differently/better in > Darwin as of now? The Darwin source has a checkered past. For the kernel, most of the BSD-like part is Lite2-derived, I think (but of course, with a *lot* of work done on it in the interim). The network part was updated to FreeBSD 3.1-2 last year. I haven't looked into the changes from 3.x to 4/5, but I'd guess the answer is "no". Using cscope, I see about 170 references to ENOBUFS, and only two are checking for the value; the rest set/return it. Regards, Justin To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message