From owner-cvs-all Sat Jun 23 10: 7:10 2001 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from prism.flugsvamp.com (cb58709-a.mdsn1.wi.home.com [24.17.241.9]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 815ED37B405; Sat, 23 Jun 2001 10:07:03 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jlemon@flugsvamp.com) Received: (from jlemon@localhost) by prism.flugsvamp.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) id f5NH5Vx18265; Sat, 23 Jun 2001 12:05:31 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from jlemon) Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2001 12:05:31 -0500 From: Jonathan Lemon To: Matt Dillon Cc: Alfred Perlstein , Mike Silbersack , cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG, jlemon@FreeBSD.ORG, bmilekic@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/netinet tcp_input.c tcp_output.c tcp_subr.c tcp_timer.c tcp_usrreq.c tcp_var.h Message-ID: <20010623120531.V33375@prism.flugsvamp.com> References: <200106230321.f5N3Llv09510@freefall.freebsd.org> <20010623102801.F57058@sneakerz.org> <200106231633.f5NGXqp72502@earth.backplane.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0pre2i In-Reply-To: <200106231633.f5NGXqp72502@earth.backplane.com> Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Sat, Jun 23, 2001 at 09:33:52AM -0700, Matt Dillon wrote: > > :* Mike Silbersack [010622 22:21] wrote: > :> silby 2001/06/22 20:21:47 PDT > :> > :> Modified files: > :> sys/netinet tcp_input.c tcp_output.c tcp_subr.c > :> tcp_timer.c tcp_usrreq.c tcp_var.h > :> Log: > :> Eliminate the allocation of a tcp template structure for each > :> connection. The information contained in a tcptemp can be > :> reconstructed from a tcpcb when needed. > : > :I may have missed it, but did you guys happen to run a perf test > :on this along the same lines as the excellent work done to benchmark > :the new mbuf allocator? > : > :My main concern is that a simple bcopy is cheaper than digging into > :the inpcb/tcpcb to fill in the packet info. > : > :There's patches avaiable to use a smaller zone-like allocation > :strategy to conserve storage space that we may want to use instead > :of eliminating it completely in case there is noticeable performance > :penalties. > : > :Could someone generate those lovely numbers we saw earlier this > :week with and without this patch? > : > :-Alfred > > I think the new way might even be faster. If the in_pseudo() call could > be optimized, the new way would definitely be faster. The problem with The in_pseudo() call _is_ optimized, at least to some point; its inline assembly in sys/i386/include/in_cksum.h. -- Jonathan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message