Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751298AbVIGXZ0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Sep 2005 19:25:26 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751320AbVIGXZ0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Sep 2005 19:25:26 -0400 Received: from wproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.184.194]:48030 "EHLO wproxy.gmail.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751298AbVIGXZZ convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Sep 2005 19:25:25 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=googlemail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=PkjNwXUa147ECft16po795y+5PCUsuEBAIc/NkEoZqtBkjO9OpCBS63IQ6yZ19TTJLX1iwRzDluPmX9gk7uT21MqTAwVZef3TV8i+Z9OggvEMiqGMOE3erlDDdlUbpWYWTmNUe4FCy19BNGhlbnkJ8+cdcBMWbDM0cPf9tyglVU= Message-ID: <58d0dbf105090716255561d04f@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2005 01:25:20 +0200 From: Jan Kiszka Reply-To: jan.kiszka@googlemail.com To: Giridhar Pemmasani Subject: Re: RFC: i386: kill !4KSTACKS Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Disposition: inline References: <20050904145129.53730.qmail@web50202.mail.yahoo.com> <431F2760.5060904@tmr.com> <58d0dbf10509071054175e82ff@mail.gmail.com> <200509071552.27543.phillips@istop.com> <58d0dbf105090713283aa455e8@mail.gmail.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1202 Lines: 27 2005/9/7, Giridhar Pemmasani : > Jan Kiszka wrote: > > > Ndiswrapper is already slower than native drivers are, also due to > > horribly implemented Windows drivers btw (the ndis model itself isn't > > that bad, though). > > Do you have any evidence to back your claims? What tests did you do to say > that ndiswrapper is slower than native driver? Under X86-64 there is some > overhead due to reshuffling of arguments, but it is so little that I doubt > if it can be measured. Giri, I'm not attacking your project. You know I'm sharing your pragmatic view. Performance is a pure technical issue. Yes, I can provide some numbers around atheros devices (10-20% speed-up). And yes, I can explain why ndiswrapper suffers from certain differences of the NDIS driver model compared to the one of Linux (just consider what had to be moved to tasklets). But I think this would better be continued on the ndiswrapper list than here. Jan - 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/