atom feed10 messages in org.freebsd.freebsd-isdnRE: i4b and netgraph (was: I4B suppor...
FromSent OnAttachments
Hellmuth MichaelisJan 28, 1999 1:23 am 
Barry ScottJan 28, 1999 3:40 am 
Archie CobbsJan 28, 1999 12:01 pm 
Archie CobbsJan 28, 1999 12:09 pm 
Hellmuth MichaelisJan 28, 1999 1:07 pm 
Archie CobbsJan 28, 1999 1:15 pm 
Julian ElischerJan 28, 1999 2:27 pm 
Barry ScottJan 29, 1999 2:47 am 
Jos BackusJan 29, 1999 8:53 am 
Julian ElischerJan 29, 1999 9:25 am 
Subject:RE: i4b and netgraph (was: I4B support for US ISDN?)
From:Barry Scott (tsba@nortelnetworks.com)
Date:Jan 28, 1999 3:40:16 am
List:org.freebsd.freebsd-isdn

- as far as i understood the netgraph docs, they also use function calls and _no_ message queues for interlayer communication. So going to netgraph would not solve the mentioned problem. BTW: i once asked Terry about the queue/function tradeoffs when that was discussed on the mailinglist and got no reply.

Having worked on both function call and queued netgraph like software I have to agree that function call is a major design bug in netgraph.

I'm sure netgraph uses direct call to get speed. But in DEC we benchmarked queuing vs. direct call and there is no advantage.

On the other hand the queuing gives many advantages.

Very few reentrancy problems. Never overflow the stack. Simpler software - faster in design, implementation and debug etc...

BArry

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-isdn" in the body of the message