Date: Thu, 22 Aug 1996 16:48:50 -0700 (PDT) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" <rgrimes@GndRsh.aac.dev.com> To: pst@jnx.com (Paul Traina) Cc: archie@whistle.com, julian@whistle.com, sos@freebsd.org, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/netinet in.h ip_fw.h ip_input.c ip_output.c Message-ID: <199608222348.QAA13113@GndRsh.aac.dev.com> In-Reply-To: <199608222258.PAA03084@base.jnx.com> from Paul Traina at "Aug 22, 96 03:58:28 pm"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> divert sockets could always be turned into a pointer-chaining module (as > should the IPFW hook itslef. I like the direction that sos layed out, now it just needs to be expanded so that the pointed to object can either be in the kernel or in user land. > From: Archie Cobbs <archie@whistle.com> > Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/netinet in.h ip_fw.h ip_input.c ip_output.c > > > > In reply to Rodney W. Grimes who wrote: > > > > > > context switches are just not going to cut it... > > though sometimes you need to do things with packets that > > require interaction with a database of reading from files etc.. > > I put it to you that having a general way of getting the packets > > out of the kernel is better than adding bloat IN the kernel to > > do these things. > > No reason we can't have both; then everybody's happy :-) > > I like Soren's "pointer chaining" idea .. as long as divert sockets > are retained. Then you can use the kernel to do something if it > is suitable (and/or you need performance), or if not, then you can > always do it in user mode. > > User mode is also good for testing & debugging new things. > > -Archie > > > ___________________________________________________________________________ > Archie L. Cobbs, archie@whistle.com * Whistle Communications Corporation > -- Rod Grimes rgrimes@gndrsh.aac.dev.com Accurate Automation Company Reliable computers for FreeBSD
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199608222348.QAA13113>