Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 23 Oct 2002 13:12:05 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 23 Oct 2002 13:12:05 -0400 Received: from e34.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.132]:5350 "EHLO e34.co.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 23 Oct 2002 13:12:03 -0400 Message-ID: <3DB6D877.3D5489DA@us.ibm.com> Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 10:12:23 -0700 From: Nivedita Singhvi X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bert hubert CC: Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk , "David S. Miller" , netdev@oss.sgi.com, Kernel mailing list Subject: Re: [RESEND] tuning linux for high network performance? References: <200210231218.18733.roy@karlsbakk.net> <20021023130101.GA646@outpost.ds9a.nl> <1035379308.5950.3.camel@rth.ninka.net> <200210231542.48673.roy@karlsbakk.net> <20021023170102.GA5302@outpost.ds9a.nl> 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: 748 Lines: 20 bert hubert wrote: > I still refuse to believe that a 1.8GHz Pentium4 can only checksum > 250megabits/second. MD Raid5 does better and they probably don't use a > checksum as braindead as that used by TCP. > > If the checksumming is not the problem, the copying is, which would be a > weakness of your hardware. The function profiled does both the copying and > the checksumming. Yep, its not so much the checksumming as the fact that this is done over each byte of data and copied. thanks, Nivedita - 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/