svn commit: r258328 - head/sys/net

[Hooman Fazaeli]

On 11/21/2013 1:32 AM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> Can we revert this and just quickly put together something else that
> won't potentially come back to bite us with weird side effects?
>
> My suggestions (and I'm happy to do this work if needed):
>
> * create a lightweight mbuf queue representation so an mbuf list isn't
> just the mbuf header pointer;
> * create a new ether input (say, ether_input_multi) that takes an mbuf
> list, so existing driver code does the right thing.
>
> After that it'd be nice to write a set of mbuf list macros for
> abstract the whole queue, dequeue, concat, iterate, etc (like
> sys/queue.h, but for mbufs.)
>
> What do people think?
>
> (I've been doing it for m->next chained things, but not m->m_nextpkt things..)
>
>
>
> -adrian
>
>
>
What are possible sideeffects? What are the benefits we achieve by a distinct
queue structure and having both if_input and if_input_multi?


-- 

Best regards.
Hooman Fazaeli