| To: | jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Is sendfile all that sexy? |
| From: | Pavel Machek <pavel@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 16 Jan 2001 15:41:16 +0100 |
| Cc: | linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <Pine.GSO.4.30.0101160845490.17392-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; from hadi@xxxxxxxxxx on Tue, Jan 16, 2001 at 08:47:22AM -0500 |
| References: | <20010116001633.A3343@xxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.GSO.4.30.0101160845490.17392-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
Hi!
> > > TWO observations:
> > > - Given Linux's non-pre-emptability of the kernel i get the feeling that
> > > sendfile could starve other user space programs. Imagine trying to send a
> > > 1Gig file on 10Mbps pipe in one shot.
> >
> > Hehe, try sigkilling process doing that transfer. Last time I tried it
> > it did not work.
>
> >From Alexey's response: it does get descheduled possibly every sndbuf
> send. So you should be able to sneak that sigkill.
Did you actually tried it? Last time I did the test, SIGKILL did not
make it in. sendfile did not actually check for signals...
(And you could do something like send 100MB from cache into dev
null. I do not see where sigkill could sneak in in this case.)
Pavel
--
The best software in life is free (not shareware)! Pavel
GCM d? s-: !g p?:+ au- a--@ w+ v- C++@ UL+++ L++ N++ E++ W--- M- Y- R+
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: routable interfaces, Gleb Natapov |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | netlink drops messages., Gleb Natapov |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Is sendfile all that sexy?, jamal |
| Next by Thread: | Question on 2.2.18 and setting a device to PROMISC., Ben Greear |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |