Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 09:09:42 +0100 (BST) From: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> To: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bz@FreeBSD.org> Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern uipc_socket.c src/sys/netinet udp_usrreq.c src/sys/sys socketvar.h Message-ID: <20080703090831.H69986@fledge.watson.org> In-Reply-To: <20080703074940.M57089@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> References: <200807022324.m62NOr92019713@repoman.freebsd.org> <20080703074940.M57089@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 3 Jul 2008, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote: >> Add soreceive_dgram(9), an optimized socket receive function for use by >> datagram-only protocols, such as UDP. This version removes use of >> sblock(), which is not required due to an inability to interlace data >> improperly with datagrams, as well as avoiding some of the larger loops >> and state management that don't apply on datagram sockets. >> >> This is experimental code, so hook it up only for UDPv4 for testing; if > > Out of curiosity could one hook it up for v6 as well or is there code > missing (haven't read the diff yet). There might be people who would want to > test experimental v6 paths as well if possible... I've hooked up soreceive_dgram() only for UDPv4, but Paul Saab has volunteered to do UDPv6 testing. Asuming that goes well, I'll hook up UDPv6 sometime soon also. As far as I know, no code is missing -- in principle, soreceive_dgram() could also be used for IP raw sockets, Appletalk, IPX, etc, as well. Robert N M Watson Computer Laboratory University of Cambridge
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080703090831.H69986>