[lkml]   [2001]   [Jan]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Is sendfile all that sexy?

    On Thu, 18 Jan 2001, Linus Torvalds wrote:

    > > Actually, this is a great example, because at one point I was working
    > > on a device interface which would offload all of the disk-disk copying
    > > overhead to the disks themselves, and not involve the CPU/RAM at all.
    > It's a horrible example.
    > device-to-device copies sound like the ultimate thing.
    > They suck. They add a lot of complexity and do not work in general. And,
    > if your "normal" usage pattern really is to just move the data without
    > even looking at it, then you have to ask yourself whether you're doing
    > something worthwhile in the first place.
    > Not going to happen.

    device-to-device is not the same as disk-to-disk. A better example would
    be a streaming file server. Slowly the pci bus becomes a bottleneck, why
    would you want to move the data twice over the pci bus if once is enough
    and the data very likely not needed afterwards? Sure you can use a more
    expensive 64bit/60MHz bus, but why should you if the 32bit/30MHz bus is
    theoretically fast enough for your application?
    So I'm not advising it as "the ultimate thing", but I don't understand,
    why it shouldn't happen.

    bye, Roman

    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 13:26    [W:0.022 / U:10.996 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site