From owner-freebsd-current Thu Jan 2 13:17:50 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02B3B37B401 for ; Thu, 2 Jan 2003 13:17:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from duke.cs.duke.edu (duke.cs.duke.edu [152.3.140.1]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4547843EA9 for ; Thu, 2 Jan 2003 13:17:48 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from gallatin@cs.duke.edu) Received: from grasshopper.cs.duke.edu (grasshopper.cs.duke.edu [152.3.145.30]) by duke.cs.duke.edu (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h02LHlro025354 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO); Thu, 2 Jan 2003 16:17:47 -0500 (EST) Received: (from gallatin@localhost) by grasshopper.cs.duke.edu (8.11.6/8.9.1) id h02LHgr48711; Thu, 2 Jan 2003 16:17:42 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from gallatin@cs.duke.edu) From: Andrew Gallatin MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15892.44150.747656.722752@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 16:17:42 -0500 (EST) To: Bosko Milekic Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: mbuf header bloat ? In-Reply-To: <20030102160028.A25488@unixdaemons.com> References: <15841.17237.826666.653505@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> <20021125130005.A75177@unixdaemons.com> <15842.27547.385354.151541@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> <20021125160122.A75673@unixdaemons.com> <15842.51914.871010.137070@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> <20021126191526.B78371@unixdaemons.com> <15892.35521.181516.714686@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> <20030102152930.A25321@unixdaemons.com> <15892.42354.150878.922603@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> <20030102160028.A25488@unixdaemons.com> X-Mailer: VM 6.75 under 21.1 (patch 12) "Channel Islands" XEmacs Lucid Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Bosko Milekic writes: > > Yeah, this looks like the least-intrusive way to do it. I'm okay with > the patch. I like the idea of using an EXT-type flag to mark the data > buffer types using this method. Thanks. Thanks.. Committed. > P.S.: Try not to use MEXTADD, if possible. Use m_extadd() instead, > which is the procedure-equivalent version. MEXTADD is just provided > for 'backwards-compatibility'. It used to be a large ugly macro. Oh, OK. That's fine. I'm happy to just use m_extadd(). Thanks for the tip. Drew To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message