On Wed, Nov 23, 2005 at 07:17:01PM -0500, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 23, 2005 at 11:30:08PM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > The main problem I see is that it'll likely only pay off when you can keep
> > the queue of copies long (to amortize the cost of
> > talking to an external chip). At least for the standard recvmsg
> > skb->user space, user space-> skb cases these queues are
> > likely short in most cases. That's because most applications
> > do relatively small recvmsg or sendmsgs.
>
> Don't forget that there are benefits of not polluting the cache with the
> traffic for the incoming skbs.
Is that a general benefit outside benchmarks? I would expect
most real programs to actually do something with the data
- and that usually involves needing it in cache.
> > But it's not clear it's a good idea: a lot of these applications prefer to
> > have the target in cache. And IOAT will force it out of cache.
>
> In the I/O AT case it might make sense to do a few prefetch()es of the
> userland data on the return-to-userspace code path.
Some prefetches for user space might be a good idea yes
> Similarly, we should
> make sure that network drivers prefetch the header at the earliest possible
> time, too.
It's done kind of already but tricky to get right because
the prefetch distances upto use are not really long enough
-Andi
-
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]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
