Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 16 Jan 2002 10:29:54 -0500 | From | Hubertus Franke <> | Subject | Re: [Lse-tech] zerocopy pipe, new version |
| |
On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 03:20:38PM -0500, Benjamin LaHaise wrote: > On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 09:08:45PM +0100, Manfred Spraul wrote: > > My patch is definitively WIP - right now I again broke the -ENOMEM and > > -EFAULT handling. > > I am aware of that, but the lse-tech posting made it sound as if things are > great now since the SMP numbers improved. Please folks, remember that UP > numbers are important too. > > -ben > -- > Fish.
Ben, yes you are right, the lse-posting in a second reading is misleading. As reported previously http://lse.sourceforge.net/pipe/pipe-report UP numbers see degradations for LM-Bench, other benchmarks are OK.
This is not solved either by an integration of zero-copy with large pipes. We have however shown that the for SMP systems adding larger pipes to zero-copy pipes makes sense and for UP and 1-way sticking with a 1-page pipe does not degradate Manfred's patch.
It hence boils down to a proper parameterization of the pipe dependent on the configuration.
-- Hubertus
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |