On Wed, 24 Jan 2007, Randall Stewart wrote:
Well.. no I believe someone (was in Lin) mentioned that you can get a live-lock if you allow a reduction.. and thus the mbuf clusters were NOT allowed to be reduced..
I messed around with this a bit when changing the limit on net.inet.tcp.maxtcptw. It looked to me as if lowering the limit on a zone, even one that has UMA_ZONE_NOFREE, worked as expected. (As expected in the UMA_ZONE_NOFREE case was that the zone could not shrink below the maximum that was ever allocated in it.)
I can see how problems could result if someone starts changing that setting while the system is in some sort of mbuf exhaustion state, but I think that the benefit of being able to tune it most of the time far outweighs the disadvantage of things going wrong in a few cases.
Granted, I haven't even looked at your patch, so I could be missing something subtle. :)
Mike "Silby" Silbersack _______________________________________________ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
