On Fri, May 31, 2002 at 11:29:20AM -0700, Archie Cobbs wrote: ... if you add the additional Note, then it might be worthwhile that the writability of the returned buffer should be checked in the standard way (whatever macro it is, i forget the name).
cheers luigi > > --- kern/uipc_mbuf.c.orig Fri May 31 11:17:52 2002 > +++ kern/uipc_mbuf.c Fri May 31 11:27:42 2002 > @@ -1194,6 +1194,10 @@ > * Partition an mbuf chain in two pieces, returning the tail -- > * all but the first len0 bytes. In case of failure, it returns NULL and > * attempts to restore the chain to its original state. > + * > + * Note that the returned mbuf must be treated as read-only, because > + * it will end up sharing an mbuf cluster with the original mbuf if the > + * "breaking point" happens to lie within a cluster mbuf. > */ > struct mbuf * > m_split(m0, len0, wait) > @@ -1247,7 +1251,6 @@ > else > (*(m->m_ext.ext_ref))(m->m_ext.ext_buf, > m->m_ext.ext_size); > - m->m_ext.ext_size = 0; /* For Accounting XXXXXX danger */ > n->m_data = m->m_data + len; > } else { > bcopy(mtod(m, caddr_t) + len, mtod(n, caddr_t), remain); > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message