Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 17 Oct 2004 17:58:43 -0400 (EDT)
From:      Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org>
To:        Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>
Cc:        Marc UBM Bocklet <ubm@u-boot-man.de>
Subject:   Re: [BETA7-panic] sodealloc(): so_count 1
Message-ID:  <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1041017175742.29749D-100000@fledge.watson.org>
In-Reply-To: <4172E741.7080508@elischer.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004, Julian Elischer wrote:

> I.e., it sounds like a
> > reference count issue due to sockets using a slightly aberrant reference
> > model.  I'll try to come up with a workaround sometime in the next 12-24
> > hours, and hopefully also a proper fix.
> 
> At the risk of sounding like a broken record, if we had a central policy
> on how reference counts were done, and library/include support for doing
> it we would be some distance ahead fo where we are now.. 
> 
> There are too many examples of "aberrant reference model". 

I've actually looked a little at normalizing socket reference counting,
but it uses a moderate number of "Weak" references, including a reference
from the protocol that isn't counted, as well as possible references from
the listen queues.  It is my intent to investigate this more, and possibly
move to a more normal referencing scheme, but not before 5.3.

Robert N M Watson             FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Projects
robert@fledge.watson.org      Principal Research Scientist, McAfee Research




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.NEB.3.96L.1041017175742.29749D-100000>