Subject: Re: ipsec pcb/socket passing
To: None <wrstuden@netbsd.org>
From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino <itojun@itojun.org>
List: tech-net
Date: 08/26/2003 15:35:28
> I understand that policy, and I respect it. Usually, I follow it also.
>
> But we're talking about part of the kernel that has a huge impact on
> network throughput. It really needs to be lean and mean. While what you're
> describing is fine for IA-32 and moderately-heavy loads, if we push the
> envelope, either with lots of connections or with lighter (embedded)
> hardware, we'll be hurting ourselves.
>
> What parts along the so->so_proto->pr_domain->dom_family chain will change
> during a socket's lifetime? I think the best thing to do is comment "If
> you change this, you need to change the in{,6}pcb."
ok, i understand. if there's no problem in breaking kmem grovellers
i can introduce "int inp_af" field to inpcb (location aligned with
in6pcb) and use it to distinguish the two. i also can make inpcbtable
unified (instead of inpcbtable/in6pcbtable) but i'm not sure how
good hash distribution will be.
itojun