Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 13:11:30 -0700 (PDT) From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> To: raviprasad20@netscape.net Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: why mbuf? Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0107201307580.99842-100000@InterJet.elischer.org> In-Reply-To: <7F8F8796.33735BFF.9513E96F@netscape.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Do you mean why did the original BSD people choose the methos used in the mbuf code in 1982 (or whenever)? 1/ copying data is a waste of time 2/ incoming packets are of unpredictable size but tend to be either full-size or small with few in between. 3/ memory was expensive and slow On Fri, 20 Jul 2001 raviprasad20@netscape.net wrote: > Hi, > > My question is why did you choose mbuf? > is it because you are writing the code in unix systems? > Is it because mbufs allow us to avoid coping as much as possible? > > I feel that a linear buffer might have saved some of the mbuf > modifications. > > regards > ravi prasad > > > > __________________________________________________________________ > Your favorite stores, helpful shopping tools and great gift ideas. Experience the convenience of buying online with Shop@Netscape! http://shopnow.netscape.com/ > > Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Mail account today at http://webmail.netscape.com/ > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message > 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?Pine.BSF.4.21.0107201307580.99842-100000>