Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 27 May 2003 22:38:55 +0400 (MSD)
From:      Igor Sysoev <is@rambler-co.ru>
To:        Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>
Cc:        arch@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: sendfile(2) SF_NOPUSH flag proposal
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.4.21.0305272237140.49544-100000@is>
In-Reply-To: <3ED39260.27639328@mindspring.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 27 May 2003, Terry Lambert wrote:

> Why?  Why not just fix the broken sendfile(2) implementation,
> instead?

Well, how ?

> So there's no barrier to you fixing this by either breaking
> up tcp_output() into two functions, or lazy-calling tcp_output(),
> instead of aggreesively calling it between headers and file
> data and file data and trailers in sendfile(2).  Right?  No
> API change necessary?

Did you look inside sendfile() implementation ?
There'are no tcp_output() calls at all.  Header and trailer are written by
writev() and file pages are written by so->so_proto->pr_usrreqs->pru_send().


Igor Sysoev
http://sysoev.ru/en/



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0305272237140.49544-100000>