Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 12 Oct 2002 19:53:17 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 12 Oct 2002 19:53:17 -0400 Received: from AMarseille-201-1-3-116.abo.wanadoo.fr ([193.253.250.116]:10608 "EHLO zion.wanadoo.fr") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 12 Oct 2002 19:53:17 -0400 From: "Benjamin Herrenschmidt" To: "Alan Cox" , "Zapp Foster" Cc: "Linux Kernel Mailing List" Subject: Re: Performance improvement inquiry Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2002 01:58:49 +0200 Message-Id: <20021012235849.21437@192.168.4.1> In-Reply-To: <1034458414.15067.25.camel@irongate.swansea.linux.org.uk> References: <1034458414.15067.25.camel@irongate.swansea.linux.org.uk> X-Mailer: CTM PowerMail 4.0.1 carbon MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 957 Lines: 25 >> First question: Will compiling a kernel with >> the network module resident (as opposed to a loadable >> module) make network performance any better? From >> the reading, it appears that resident modules are only >> faster in initialization, not runtime. I'm new to >> this, so please correct me if I'm wrong. > >Modules are very very fractionally slower than compiled in code due to >TLB misses Depends on which arch... on ppc32 (ahem... no bad joke pls ;), function calls from modules to kernel or between modules has to go through some "branch islands" as they don't fit within the scope of a "short" branch PPC insn. So you also get a small perf. loss there, but I bet it's barely measurable. Ben. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/