Date: Tue, 20 Feb 1996 15:31:50 -0800 From: David Greenman <davidg@Root.COM> To: Andreas Klemm <andreas@knobel.gun.de> Cc: nao@sbl.cl.nec.co.jp (Naoki Hamada), hackers@FreeBSD.org, current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: mbuf enhancement patch Message-ID: <199602202331.PAA04282@Root.COM> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 18 Feb 1996 20:00:52 %2B0100." <199602181900.UAA02120@knobel.gun.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> I found mbuf's are not buffered though mclusters are. So here is my >> patch for /sys/sys/mbuf.h. This seems to provide me slightly good >> network performance. > >Did one of the core team members accept these patches >officially ?! Will they go into -current ? No. The performance improvemment is actually quite small and the effect of this is that any buffers malloced up to the high water mark won't be available to other parts of the system after they are freed. We generally try to avoid private pools of buffers unless it's absolutely necessary - which is case for mbuf clusters, for example, which has a mechanism for maintaining reference counts that requires them to be allocated out of a private pool. We once had changes similar to the ones you've provided, except we had it so that the buffers over a certain threshold were returned back to malloc. The problem with this was that the malloc type was lost in the process and this messed up the malloc-type accounting (which eventually leads to malloc failures). -DG David Greenman Core-team/Principal Architect, The FreeBSD Project
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199602202331.PAA04282>