[lkml]   [2001]   [Jan]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PLEASE-TESTME] Zerocopy networking patch, 2.4.0-1
Ingo Molnar wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Jan 2001, Manfred Spraul wrote:
> > That means sendmsg() changes the page tables? I measures
> > smp_call_function on my Dual Pentium 350, and it took around 1950 cpu
> > ticks.
> well, this is a performance problem if you are using threads. For normal
> processes there is no need for a SMP cross-call, there TLB flushes are
> local only.
But that would be ugly as hell:
so apache 2.0 would become slower with MSG_NOCOPY, whereas samba 2.2
would become faster.

Is is possible to move the responsibility for maitaining the copy to the

e.g. use msg_control, and then the caller can request either that a
signal is sent when that data is transfered, or that a variable is set
to 0.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:28    [W:0.083 / U:0.136 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site