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/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
| |
 |