From owner-cvs-all  Tue Jun 26 10:18:11 2001
Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org
Received: from sneakerz.org (sneakerz.org [216.33.66.254])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id EC3E737B401; Tue, 26 Jun 2001 10:18:02 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from bright@sneakerz.org)
Received: by sneakerz.org (Postfix, from userid 1092)
	id 7A9995D021; Tue, 26 Jun 2001 12:17:52 -0500 (CDT)
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 12:17:52 -0500
From: "Jonathan Lemon <jlemon@flugsvamp.com>    Alfred Perlstein" <bright@sneakerz.org>
To: Matt Dillon <dillon@earth.backplane.com>
Cc: "Brian F. Feldman" <green@FreeBSD.ORG>,
	Mike Silbersack <silby@silby.com>,
	Mike Silbersack <silby@FreeBSD.ORG>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG,
	cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG, jlemon@FreeBSD.ORG, bmilekic@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/netinet tcp_input.c tcp_output.c tcp_subr.c tcp_timer.c tcp_usrreq.c tcp_var.h
Message-ID: <20010626121752.L64836@sneakerz.org>
References: <200106242141.f5OLfc176777@green.bikeshed.org> <200106261647.f5QGlRr24342@earth.backplane.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i
In-Reply-To: <200106261647.f5QGlRr24342@earth.backplane.com>; from dillon@earth.backplane.com on Tue, Jun 26, 2001 at 09:47:27AM -0700
Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <cvs-all.FreeBSD.ORG>
List-Archive: <http://docs.freebsd.org/mail/> (Web Archive)
List-Help: <mailto:majordomo?subject=help> (List Instructions)
List-Subscribe: <mailto:majordomo?subject=subscribe%20cvs-all>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo?subject=unsubscribe%20cvs-all>
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

* Matt Dillon <dillon@earth.backplane.com> [010626 11:47] wrote:
> :
> :That's pretty pointless; M_ZERO is _supposed_ to eventually be providing 
> :pre-zeroed memory, which should remove that bzero in the general case, 
> :anyway.
> :
> 
>     * We can give up on trying to optimize bzero() within malloc() and
>       instead concentrate on giving malloc() a pre-zeroing feature, which
>       is where malloc()'s M_ZERO flag was heading in the first place.
> 
>     Either way, I don't think this has much to do with the inline bzero()ing
>     code that I am proposing.

Agreed, wrt idle zeroing of data, the problem that I see is that
it seems that idleproc may not aquire mutexes, at least that's the
impression I get from the SMP team (jhb and crew).  I feel that
idleproc should at least be able to trylock if we're going to make
any use of it at all.

Is this planned or possible?

-Alfred

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message