From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 7 May 2001 13:54:04 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 7 May 2001 13:53:56 -0400 Received: from se1.cogenit.fr ([195.68.53.173]:47625 "EHLO cogenit.fr") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 7 May 2001 13:53:41 -0400 Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 19:53:33 +0200 From: Francois Romieu To: alexander.eichhorn@rz.tu-ilmenau.de Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [Question] Explanation of zero-copy networking Message-ID: <20010507195333.A13072@se1.cogenit.fr> In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: ; from root@chaos.analogic.com on Mon, May 07, 2001 at 12:12:57PM -0400 X-Organisation: Marie's fan club - I Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Richard B. Johnson ecrit : [...] > when the hardware I/O is used. This shows that the network code, alone, > cannot be improved very much to provide an improvement in throughput. It shows that cached code performs well with ~0us latency device/memory. Networking is about latency and pps too. They both dramatically reduce the (axe-)evaluated bandwith. -- Ueimor