Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 11:27:22 -0700 (PDT) From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> Cc: FreeBSD current users <current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: speeding up ugen by an order of magnitude. Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0407071122290.80217-100000@InterJet.elischer.org> In-Reply-To: <33631.1089191774@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 7 Jul 2004, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > In message <20040707091311.GE12877@cicely12.cicely.de>, Bernd Walter writes: > >On Tue, Jul 06, 2004 at 04:32:28PM -0700, Julian Elischer wrote: > > >What about those options: > >- limit the allocated memory to the user request so we don't take the > > whole 128k if not reuired. > >- Do interleaving with 2 or more xfers if the read request is known to > > take more xfers. > > I would consider ugen to be a primary candidate to use physio like > I belive scsi-tape drives do ? I believe that is a good candidate. I considerred this as an option but I haven't looked to see how compaitble NetBSD physio still is with our diverged physio. FOr reasns of future co-operation, I'd like to keep diffs to a minimum. As it is out USB code is VERY close to NetBSD except for umass.c which is qiite different. > > -- > Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 > phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 > FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe > Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0407071122290.80217-100000>