Bruce M Simpson wrote:
I'd be happy to review other patches for this. My personal feeling though
is that the actual performance increase may not be that great, but it's
a case of someone implementing it and doing the math.
Writing to memory, specially on SMP systems, is very expensive. So
eli
On 11 Jan, Bruce M Simpson wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 09, 2004 at 03:51:43PM -0600, Guy Helmer wrote:
>> I want to look at memory-mapped access to the BPF device.
>> This would preserve the existing network device drivers
>> while reducing mbuf copies, context switches/user-kernel
>> transitions, and lat
On Fri, Jan 09, 2004 at 03:51:43PM -0600, Guy Helmer wrote:
> I want to look at memory-mapped access to the BPF device.
> This would preserve the existing network device drivers
> while reducing mbuf copies, context switches/user-kernel
> transitions, and latency. Performance ought to be
> compara
Richard Bejtlich wrote on January 09, 2004 11:17 AM
> I was wondering if anyone read the paper by Luca Deri
> (of Ntop fame) on "Improving Passive Packet Capture:
> Beyond Device Polling":
>
> http://luca.ntop.org/Ring.pdf
>
> Luca makes some astounding claims regarding packet
> capture performa
