2005/9/7, Giridhar Pemmasani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Jan Kiszka wrote: > > > Ndiswrapper is already slower than native drivers are, also due to > > horribly implemented Windows drivers btw (the ndis model itself isn't > > that bad, though). > > Do you have any evidence to back your claims? What tests did you do to say > that ndiswrapper is slower than native driver? Under X86-64 there is some > overhead due to reshuffling of arguments, but it is so little that I doubt > if it can be measured.
Giri, I'm not attacking your project. You know I'm sharing your pragmatic view. Performance is a pure technical issue. Yes, I can provide some numbers around atheros devices (10-20% speed-up). And yes, I can explain why ndiswrapper suffers from certain differences of the NDIS driver model compared to the one of Linux (just consider what had to be moved to tasklets). But I think this would better be continued on the ndiswrapper list than here. Jan - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
