[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090625091519.23bc42ff@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 09:15:19 +0100
From: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: Daniel Walker <dwalker@...o99.com>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.ml.walleij@...il.com>,
Brian Swetland <swetland@...gle.com>,
Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@...roid.com>,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <greg@...ah.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, hackbod@...roid.com,
Marcel Holtmann <marcel@...tmann.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] staging: android: binder: Remove some funny &&
usage
On Wed, 24 Jun 2009 17:20:19 -0700
Daniel Walker <dwalker@...o99.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-06-25 at 02:01 +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
>
> > What I really want to know, is how this relates to the vmsplice() and
> > other zero-copy buffer passing schemes already in the kernel. I was
> > sort of dreaming that D-Bus and other IPC could be accelerated on
> > top of that.
>
> Marcel had mentioned earlier in this thread that D-Bus could be
> accelerated with shared memory or moving the dbus-daemon into the
> kernel. splice() and vmplice() seem like fairly robust system calls. I
> would think they could be used also ..
Except for very large amounts of data what makes you think zero copy
buffer passing will be fast ? TLB shootdowns are expensive and they scale
horribly badly with threaded apps on multiprocessor systems ?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists