From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 9 Jan 2001 10:41:25 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 9 Jan 2001 10:41:15 -0500 Received: from chiara.elte.hu ([157.181.150.200]:16396 "HELO chiara.elte.hu") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Tue, 9 Jan 2001 10:41:08 -0500 Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2001 16:40:46 +0100 (CET) From: Ingo Molnar Reply-To: To: Stephen Frost Cc: "Stephen C. Tweedie" , Rik van Riel , "David S. Miller" , , , Subject: Re: [PLEASE-TESTME] Zerocopy networking patch, 2.4.0-1 In-Reply-To: <20010109102525.Q26953@ns> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 9 Jan 2001, Stephen Frost wrote: > Now, the interesting bit here is that the processes can grow to be > pretty large (200M+, up as high as 500M, higher if we let it ;) ) and what > happens with MOSIX is that entire processes get sent over the wire to > other machines for work. MOSIX will also attempt to rebalance the load on > all of the machines in the cluster and whatnot so it can often be moving > processes back and forth. then you'll love the zerocopy patch :-) Just use sendfile() or specify MSG_NOCOPY to sendmsg(), and you'll see effective memory-to-card DMA-and-checksumming on cards that support it. the discussion with Stephen is about various device-to-device schemes. (which Mosix i dont think wants to use. Mosix wants to use memory to device zero-copy, right?) Ingo - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/