BSD network memory allocation bug

[qqi at world.std.com (Quality Quorum)]

On Fri, 21 May 1999, D. V. Henkel-Wallace wrote:

> At 14:18 21-05-99 -0400, Quality Quorum wrote:
> >I do not bleive that RTOS has to follow same logic UNIX in the case:
> >
> >     1. Work load of RTOS stuff is more predictale so in many
> >        cases there is enough information to figure out
> >        necessary size of mbuf free list.
> >
> >     2. All IP based protocols will recover from packet loss
> >        without too many problems.
> >
> >     3. Memory is cheap.
> >
> >So, the most natuarl thing is to have pool of mbuffs and return
> >NULL in all cases (WAIT and NO_WAIT) when it is exhausted.
> >
> >Simple systems == reliable systems.
> 
> I don't agree.  If the user wanted WAIT, you should implement it.

Show me this user :). I suppose one you are talking about 
did run 100 user terminals on 2MB VAX in mib-80s.

WAIT for mbufs is simply a costly anachronism. 

BTW, I think that Eric has a valid point in preserving original BSD
code base. However, it is not related to effectivness/functionality
at all.

> 

Thanks,

Alesey