[Top] [All Lists]

Re: sendfile+zerocopy: fairly sexy (nothing to do with ECN)

To: Andrew Morton <andrewm@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: sendfile+zerocopy: fairly sexy (nothing to do with ECN)
From: Ion Badulescu <ionut@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 02:09:41 -0800
Cc: lkml <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx" <netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Aaron Lehmann <aaronl@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <3A728475.34CF841@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: tin/1.4.4-20000803 ("Vet for the Insane") (UNIX) (Linux/2.2.18 (i586))
On Sat, 27 Jan 2001 19:19:01 +1100, Andrew Morton <andrewm@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> The figures I quoted for the no-hw-checksum case were still
> using scatter/gather.  That can be turned off as well and
> it makes it a tiny bit quicker.

Hmm. Are you sure the differences are not just noise? Unless you
modified the zerocopy patch yourself, it won't use SG without

In fact it would be interesting to revert that policy and
see how much SG alone helps. Probably not much, since the
CPU checksumming is close to onecopy.


  It is better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool,
            than to open it and remove all doubt.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>