Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 20:00:41 +0200 From: Andre Oppermann <oppermann@networx.ch> To: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@cell.sick.ru> Cc: net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: small tun(4) improvement Message-ID: <416EBEC9.AF037EBB@networx.ch> References: <20041014174225.GB49508@cell.sick.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Gleb Smirnoff wrote: > > Collegues, > > any objections about commiting this improvement to tun(4)? > In my ng_device I have a similar function ngdwrite(), which was > cut-n-pasted from tunwrite(). And my tests with a patched ng_device have > shown 30% speedup on large writes. I don't think it will help tun(4) > to be a much faster, since tunwrite() isn't a bottleneck, but I think > it is worth considering. The patch was tested on a production PPPoE access > concentrator (RELENG_4 however). Looks good! Nice optimization, long overdue. ;-) -- Andre
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?416EBEC9.AF037EBB>