| To: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: zerocopy results on GigE |
| From: | Jes Sorensen <jes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | 06 Feb 2001 23:02:54 +0100 |
| Cc: | Pekka Pietikainen <pp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | "David S. Miller"'s message of "Tue, 6 Feb 2001 13:36:32 -0800 (PST)" |
| References: | <20010206194919.A633@netppl.fi> <14976.28256.593782.781889@pizda.ninka.net> |
| Sender: | owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Gnus/5.070096 (Pterodactyl Gnus v0.96) Emacs/20.4 |
>>>>> "David" == David S Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: David> Pekka Pietikainen writes: >> Jumbo frames, sender is dual pIII/500 with 32/66 PCI, receiver a >> dual pII/450 with 32/33, both have 1MB Alteons. CPU use is measured >> using cyclesoak. SO_RCVBUF/SO_SNDBUF set to 512k, no other >> sockopts touched. David> Strange, cpu usage is close to nothing for sendfile cases yet David> full bandwidth is not obtained. Here is what I am getting on David> UltraSparc systems: One thing that might be worth investigating is that the AceNIC has a high latency for reading buffer descriptors. One of the plans I have is to linearize small skb's before handing them to the NIC. Jes |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: zerocopy results on GigE, David S. Miller |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: zerocopy results on GigE, Andrew Morton |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: zerocopy results on GigE, David S. Miller |
| Next by Thread: | Re: zerocopy results on GigE, Andrew Morton |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |