From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Mar 25 17:55:20 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-src@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76EB237B404; Tue, 25 Mar 2003 17:55:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from ebb.errno.com (ebb.errno.com [66.127.85.87]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53B5E43FE3; Tue, 25 Mar 2003 17:55:16 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from sam@errno.com) Received: from melange (melange.errno.com [66.127.85.82]) (authenticated bits=0) by ebb.errno.com (8.12.8/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h2Q1t8mm010055 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 25 Mar 2003 17:55:09 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from sam@errno.com) Message-ID: <150f01c2f33a$bb131d40$52557f42@errno.com> From: "Sam Leffler" To: "Mike Silbersack" , "Doug Ambrisko" References: <200303252344.h2PNip18098878@www.ambrisko.com> <20030325194313.F458@odysseus.silby.com> Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 17:54:55 -0800 Organization: Errno Consulting MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4920.2300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4920.2300 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-9.8 required=5.0 tests=QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REFERENCES version=2.50 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/conf options src/sys/netinet ip_output.c X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 01:55:23 -0000 > I've been pondering where the tradeoff between avoiding memory copies and > doing excessive scatter / gather DMA lies. Perhaps we should be > defragmenting any chain over a certain amount of length, no matter the > limit imposed by the card. This sounds like a Terry question. :) I hit this in fast ipsec. I do "agressive coalescing" when creating writable mbuf chains on output. It's a big win for various things. Full results will be in the paper I'm writing for bsdcon. Sam