Page MenuHomeFreeBSD

mbuf: Add M_WRITABLE_EXTPG
AcceptedPublic

Authored by jhb on Sep 25 2024, 3:13 PM.
Tags
None
Referenced Files
Unknown Object (File)
Sun, Oct 12, 7:17 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Fri, Oct 3, 5:44 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Wed, Oct 1, 4:56 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Mon, Sep 22, 1:48 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Sep 14 2025, 11:37 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Aug 14 2025, 10:40 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Jun 28 2025, 4:37 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Jun 26 2025, 4:15 PM
Subscribers

Details

Reviewers
gallatin
kp
Summary

This can be used instead of M_WRITABLE where the calling code is
prepared to handle writing to M_EXTPG mbufs.

Diff Detail

Repository
rG FreeBSD src repository
Lint
Lint Skipped
Unit
Tests Skipped
Build Status
Buildable 59597
Build 56484: arc lint + arc unit

Event Timeline

jhb requested review of this revision.Sep 25 2024, 3:13 PM

I'm confused.. if we are marking non-writable M_EXTPG mufs as M_RDONLY, why can't we simply remove the M_EXTPG check from M_WRITABLE? Why do we need a new macro?

I'm confused.. if we are marking non-writable M_EXTPG mufs as M_RDONLY, why can't we simply remove the M_EXTPG check from M_WRITABLE? Why do we need a new macro?

Because there are many places that call M_WRITABLE in the tree and if it succeeds expect to directly use mtod() to get a writable pointer to the data payload (possibly after using m_pullup which panics if called on an M_EXTPG mbuf). m_copyback() is explicitly aware of M_EXTPG mbufs and handles them correctly, so the new macro works fine the assertion there.

This revision is now accepted and ready to land.Sep 26 2024, 2:37 PM