Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264152AbTKZLaq (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Nov 2003 06:30:46 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264155AbTKZLaq (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Nov 2003 06:30:46 -0500 Received: from 81-2-122-30.bradfords.org.uk ([81.2.122.30]:7040 "EHLO 81-2-122-30.bradfords.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264152AbTKZLap (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Nov 2003 06:30:45 -0500 Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 11:35:03 GMT From: John Bradford Message-Id: <200311261135.hAQBZ3Ku000202@81-2-122-30.bradfords.org.uk> To: Andi Kleen , "David S. Miller" Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: References: <20031125183035.1c17185a.davem@redhat.com.suse.lists.linux.kernel> Subject: Re: Fire Engine?? Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 977 Lines: 26 Quote from Andi Kleen : > "David S. Miller" writes: > > > > So his claim is that, in their mesaurements, "CPU utilization" > > was lower in their stack. Was he using 2.6.x and TSO capable > > cards on the Linux side? If not, it's not apples to apples > > against are current upcoming technology. > > Maybe they just have a better copy_to_user(). That eats most time anyways. > > I think there are definitely areas of improvements left in current TCP. > It has gotten quite fat over the last years. On the subject of general networking performance in Linux, I thought this set of benchmarks was quite interesting: http://bulk.fefe.de/scalability/ particularly the 2.4 -> 2.6 comparisons. John. - 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/