cvs commit: src/sys/sys mbuf.h src/sys/kern uipc_mbuf.c uipc_syscalls.c src/usr.bin/netstat mbuf.c src/lib/libc/sys sendfile.2

[Alfred Perlstein]

* Mike Silbersack <silby at silby.com> [040617 15:03] wrote:
> 
> Yes, you hit it right on the head, this IS a case of nitpicking.
> 
> sfbufs are used almost exclusively in conjunction with mbufs, and users
> who are interested in mbuf usage will certainly be interested in sfbuf
> usage.  This is why I displayed the information along with mbuf
> statistics, and why I see no reason to add yet another switch to netstat
> (or would it be sfstat?)
> 
> I understand the script breakage argument, but I don't think it's
> particularly potent.  Imagine this:  We have ls, but it doesn't list file
> sizes, and there was no previous tool to list file sizes.  Someone comes
> along and adds file size display to ls.  However, due to objections about
> scripts breaking, this is backed up, and a seperate option , "ls -f" is
> added, which lists file sizes.  This is the situation we're in here -
> there was NO previous way to see sfbuf statistics; we're adding new _and_
> relevant data to "netstat -m".
> 
> The implementation is an entirely different story, and I'm not disputing
> that it could be done better.

Sendfile bufs are not used by most installations.

You are cluttering useful stats on the system with something that
users don't need to see.  The data is not relevant.

You are breaking the expected output from the tool.

You are giving me a headache.

Please use a seperate flag.

-- 
- Alfred Perlstein
- Research Engineering Development Inc.
- email: bright at mu.org cell: 408-480-4684