Paul Durrant wrote:
Just doing some network TX perf. measurement on a Dell 1850 dual Xeon
box and I see that DMA mapping my buffers seems to be incredibly
costly: each mapping taking >8us, some >16us.
I dug into the ddi_dma_addr_bind_handle() operation and it seems to be
hat_getpfnum() that's slo
Paul Durrant writes:
> Just doing some network TX perf. measurement on a Dell 1850 dual Xeon
> box and I see that DMA mapping my buffers seems to be incredibly
> costly: each mapping taking >8us, some >16us.
I don't see anything this bad on an AMD based systems when running a
64-bit kernel. I
Just doing some network TX perf. measurement on a Dell 1850 dual Xeon
box and I see that DMA mapping my buffers seems to be incredibly
costly: each mapping taking >8us, some >16us.
I dug into the ddi_dma_addr_bind_handle() operation and it seems to be
hat_getpfnum() that's slow. I used the followi
