| To: | andrewm@xxxxxxxxxx (Andrew Morton) |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: sendfile+zerocopy: fairly sexy (nothing to do with ECN) |
| From: | kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| Date: | Tue, 30 Jan 2001 22:29:06 +0300 (MSK) |
| Cc: | netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <3A76B72D.2DD3E640@xxxxxxxxxx> from "Andrew Morton" at Jan 30, 1 03:45:00 pm |
| Sender: | owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
Hello! > If anyone really needs that 10% they can use the `hw_checksums=0' > module parm, but SG+xsum is enabled by default - we need the testing. Before all: where did you lose these 2.5% of cpu? You can find leak with profiling. > BTW: can you suggest why I'm not observing any change in NFS client > efficiency? No. You must see strong decrease of load. Alexey |
| Previous by Date: | Re: More measurements, kuznet |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: More measurements, kuznet |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: sendfile+zerocopy: fairly sexy (nothing to do with ECN), Andrew Morton |
| Next by Thread: | Re: sendfile+zerocopy: fairly sexy (nothing to do with ECN), Ion Badulescu |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |