Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754199AbZIWGva (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Sep 2009 02:51:30 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754011AbZIWGva (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Sep 2009 02:51:30 -0400 Received: from gate.lvk.cs.msu.su ([158.250.17.1]:59516 "EHLO lvk.cs.msu.su" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753948AbZIWGv3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Sep 2009 02:51:29 -0400 From: "Nikita V. Youshchenko" To: Linux Kernel Subject: Re: Inter-process send()/recv() using zero-copy ? Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 10:51:31 +0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.9 References: <4AB9B9B7.1020309@exalead.com> <20090923084314.78283f24@infradead.org> In-Reply-To: <20090923084314.78283f24@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200909231051.31818@zigzag.lvk.cs.msu.su> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 574 Lines: 17 > the problem you have is that > 1) memory copies are cheap > (say, 3000 cycles/page or less) What about L1 cache pollution? Doesn't it change situation? > 2) page table operations (mmap etc) are very expensive. > > these two combined tend to not make it a win to substitute simple > copies with complex pagetable tricks. -- 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/