On Sat, 27 Jan 2001 19:19:01 +1100, Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The figures I quoted for the no-hw-checksum case were still > using scatter/gather. That can be turned off as well and > it makes it a tiny bit quicker. Hmm. Are you sure the differences are not just noise? Unless you modified the zerocopy patch yourself, it won't use SG without checksums... In fact it would be interesting to revert that policy and see how much SG alone helps. Probably not much, since the CPU checksumming is close to onecopy. Ion -- It is better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool, than to open it and remove all doubt. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- sendfile+zerocopy: fairly sexy (nothing to do with ECN) Andrew Morton
- Re: sendfile+zerocopy: fairly sexy (nothing to do wit... Aaron Lehmann
- Re: sendfile+zerocopy: fairly sexy (nothing to do... Andrew Morton
- Re: sendfile+zerocopy: fairly sexy (nothing t... Ion Badulescu
- Re: sendfile+zerocopy: fairly sexy (nothi... Andrew Morton
- Re: sendfile+zerocopy: fairly sexy (nothing t... David S. Miller
- Re: sendfile+zerocopy: fairly sexy (nothi... David S. Miller
- Re: sendfile+zerocopy: fairly sexy (... David S. Miller
- Re: sendfile+zerocopy: fairly se... David S. Miller
- Re: sendfile+zerocopy: fairly sexy (... David S. Miller
- Re: sendfile+zerocopy: fairly sexy (nothi... Andrew Morton
- Re: sendfile+zerocopy: fairly sexy (... Trond Myklebust
- Re: sendfile+zerocopy: fairly sexy (... David Lang
- Re: sendfile+zerocopy: fairly se... David S. Miller