From owner-svn-src-head@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Jun  5 09:20:35 2011
Return-Path: <owner-svn-src-head@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: svn-src-head@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 365971065670;
	Sun,  5 Jun 2011 09:20:35 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from rwatson@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from cyrus.watson.org (cyrus.watson.org [65.122.17.42])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 115C08FC08;
	Sun,  5 Jun 2011 09:20:35 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [65.122.17.41])
	by cyrus.watson.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7138E46B03;
	Sun,  5 Jun 2011 05:20:34 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Sun, 5 Jun 2011 10:20:34 +0100 (BST)
From: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org>
X-X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org
To: Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <4DEB3C32.9070709@freebsd.org>
Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1106051019150.74164@fledge.watson.org>
References: <201106042331.p54NVfC0030751@svn.freebsd.org>
	<4DEB3C32.9070709@freebsd.org>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org,
	src-committers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: svn commit: r222702 - head/sys/sys
X-BeenThere: svn-src-head@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: SVN commit messages for the src tree for head/-current
	<svn-src-head.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-head>,
	<mailto:svn-src-head-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/svn-src-head>
List-Post: <mailto:svn-src-head@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:svn-src-head-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-head>,
	<mailto:svn-src-head-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 05 Jun 2011 09:20:35 -0000


On Sun, 5 Jun 2011, Julian Elischer wrote:

> hmm note that my stealing of 4 bits for FIB was supposed to go away for 8 
> and beyond. We need to do an mbuf redesign.. at this stage, I guess it's a 
> project for 10.

Indeed -- it would be nice not just to reclaim the FIB bits, but also to 
support more simultaneous FIBs.  We still need to do a KBI analysis of mbuf 
for 9.0 across various architectures, but it would be pretty late to fix the 
FIB thing.  On a redesign, clearly too late for that as well.  I still hope we 
can get the variable size mbuf cluster in for 10 though.

Robert