From owner-freebsd-bugs Wed Jun 3 05:10:48 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA00292 for freebsd-bugs-outgoing; Wed, 3 Jun 1998 05:10:48 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.FreeBSD.ORG [204.216.27.21]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id FAA00265 for ; Wed, 3 Jun 1998 05:10:41 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.5) id FAA21577; Wed, 3 Jun 1998 05:10:01 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 05:10:01 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199806031210.FAA21577@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG From: Craig Metz Subject: Re: kern/6837: in_setpeeraddr() and in_setsockaddr() block on memory Reply-To: Craig Metz Sender: owner-freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org The following reply was made to PR kern/6837; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Craig Metz To: dg@root.com Cc: freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: kern/6837: in_setpeeraddr() and in_setsockaddr() block on memory Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 08:00:07 -0300 In message <199806031159.EAA22091@implode.root.com>, you write: >> The other, far easier to explain answer, is that we're putting some code in >>there for IPv6 support that makes the malloc() happen at splnet(), and >>tsleep()ing at such a priority is not good. > > That would be bad, but I don't think the solution is to make it fail on >temporary resource shortages. I think a better solution would be to change >the functions to take an already (m)alloced struct sockaddr_in and change >the callers (I think there are only two) to accomodate. In 4.4-Lite2, they did basically just that. Why did they change? -Craig To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-bugs" in the body of the message