From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Sep 29 21:08:08 2006
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6E1516A553
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>; Fri, 29 Sep 2006 21:08:08 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from andre@freebsd.org)
Received: from c00l3r.networx.ch (c00l3r.networx.ch [62.48.2.2])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37F5943D68
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>; Fri, 29 Sep 2006 21:08:03 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from andre@freebsd.org)
Received: (qmail 97450 invoked from network); 29 Sep 2006 21:09:14 -0000
Received: from c00l3r.networx.ch (HELO [127.0.0.1]) ([62.48.2.2])
	(envelope-sender <andre@freebsd.org>)
	by c00l3r.networx.ch (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP
	for <rrs@cisco.com>; 29 Sep 2006 21:09:14 -0000
Message-ID: <451D8B32.9010204@freebsd.org>
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2006 23:08:02 +0200
From: Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.7 (Windows/20060909)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Randall Stewart <rrs@cisco.com>
References: <451C4850.5030302@freebsd.org>
	<Pine.BSF.4.58.0609281928020.20971@niwun.pair.com>
	<451D884F.1030807@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <451D884F.1030807@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, Mike Silbersack <silby@silby.com>,
	freebsd-current@freebsd.org, gallatin@cs.duke.edu
Subject: Re: Much improved sosend_*() functions
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2006 21:08:09 -0000

Randall Stewart wrote:
> Mike Silbersack wrote:
>> On Fri, 29 Sep 2006, Andre Oppermann wrote:
>>
>>
>>> over it an copies the data into the mbufs by using uiomove().  
>>> sosend_dgram()
>>> and sosend_generic() are change to use m_uiotombuf() instead of 
>>> sosend_copyin().
>>
>> Can you do some UDP testing with 512b, 1K, 2K, 4K, 8K, and 16K packets to
>> see if performance changes there as well?
> 
> Hmm.. I would think 512b and 1K will not show any
> improvement.. since they would probably end up either
> in an mbuf chain.. or a single 2k (or maybe 4k) cluster..
> ... quite a waste.. now if we had 512b and 1k clusters that
> would be cool...
> 
> In fact I have always thought we should:
> 
> a) have no data portion in an mbuf.. just pointers i.e. always
>    an EXT
> 
> b) Have a 256/512 and 1k cluster too..
> 
> This would allow copy by reference no matter what size si
> being sent...
> 
> But of course .. thats just me :-)

Well, people tell me to "profile, not speculate".  So I'm doing it
now with quite some success.  Lets file your little rant here into
the same category.  ;-)

-- 
Andre