Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 11:19:41 -0500 From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Cc: Sergey Kandaurov <pluknet@gmail.com>, perryh@pluto.rain.com, avg@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Could MSGBUF_SIZE be made a loader tunable? Message-ID: <201101181119.42053.jhb@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinz8WdEc%2B9xhceEuA0UbG0m0oaokq8FQnUzOTV5@mail.gmail.com> References: <4cfc72a5.3nAjkv8mdrO/NrKQ%perryh@pluto.rain.com> <4d3261bc.dcI6EuBnzRqvyRnz%perryh@pluto.rain.com> <AANLkTinz8WdEc%2B9xhceEuA0UbG0m0oaokq8FQnUzOTV5@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sunday, January 16, 2011 12:24:27 pm Sergey Kandaurov wrote: > On 16 January 2011 06:10, <perryh@pluto.rain.com> wrote: > > Anyone had a chance to look at this? > > > > http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/2010-December/060793.html > > To ease testing on head I have regenerated the patch > (against r216594): > http://plukky.net/~pluknet/patches/msgbufsize.diff The one hunk involving tf_rip and PS_STRINGS in amd64 looks to be unrelated. Also, in subr_param.c, you can assume that MSGBUF_SIZE is always defined and always assign it as the initial value rather than having an #ifdef. Finally, I would adjust the wording in the manpage to not say that this modifies the MSGBUF_SIZE option, but that this tunable is the same as adjusting MSGBUF_SIZE. Other than that I think it is fine. -- John Baldwin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201101181119.42053.jhb>