Steve French wrote:
> below. The obvious need is to create an SendReceive-NoResponse (or
> equivalent) which
> frees the SMB request buffer after send, and does not copy into an smb
> response buffer. The following functions need to be changed to use
>
How about modifying SendReceive to behave like that if NULL is passed as
output buffer ?
>> Obviously it is up to you, as a maintainer. I'd prefer adding a small
>> header to each buffer with the buffer size and perhaps a type, or even a
>> destructor function pointer. Simple macros could be used to obtain
>> buffer size, given the buffer body pointer, or to dispose the buffer.
>> That would save from checking the buffer type all over the code
>> explicitly, or even worse, make strange assumptions about the type of
>> buffer being passed - as we can see this is error-prone. That for a
>> little cost of a few additional bytes per buffer.
>>
> That might be better, although without memory pools, this would perform
> much worse
>
Why ? I don't get your point here.
Przemyslaw
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
