From owner-freebsd-current Wed May 12 8:45:12 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mail.promo.de (mail.Promo.DE [194.45.188.65]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A03B314C59 for ; Wed, 12 May 1999 08:44:24 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from stefan.bethke@hanse.de) Received: from d225.promo.de (d225.Promo.DE [194.45.188.225]) by mail.promo.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id RAA06808; Wed, 12 May 1999 17:44:10 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 17:43:27 +0200 From: Stefan Bethke To: Pierre Beyssac Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: mbuf starvation Message-ID: <803947.3135519807@d225.promo.de> In-Reply-To: <19990512172544.A440@enst.fr> Originator-Info: login-id=stefan; server=mail X-Mailer: Mulberry (MacOS) [1.4.2, s/n U-301178] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Pierre Beyssac wrote: > Another big problem is that there's a check in m_retry and friends > that panics when falling short of mbufs! I really believe this does > more harm than good, because it prevents correct calling code > (checking for NULL mbuf pointers) from exiting gracefully with > ENOBUFS... I've discussed this with Garett back in September. The reason is quite simple: unless all cases of not checking for a NULL pointer returned are fixed (or instrumented with a panic), it is better to fail with a panic than with some obscure problem later on. Stefan -- M=FChlendamm 12 | Voice +49-40-256848, +49-177-3504009 D-22089 Hamburg | e-mail: stefan.bethke@hanse.de Germany | stb@freebsd.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message