Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 17:37:43 -0500 From: Jonathan Lemon <jlemon@flugsvamp.com> To: "Kenneth D. Merry" <ken@kdm.org> Cc: Mike Smith <msmith@FreeBSD.ORG>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: kblob discussion. Message-ID: <20000619173743.H37084@prism.flugsvamp.com> In-Reply-To: <20000619162522.A81338@panzer.kdm.org> References: <20000619151517.A80732@panzer.kdm.org> <200006192149.OAA09723@mass.osd.bsdi.com> <20000619162522.A81338@panzer.kdm.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Jun 19, 2000 at 04:25:22PM -0600, Kenneth D. Merry wrote: > The concept, however, isn't specific to a particular platform, and in fact > similar things have been proposed and implemented. Sun's fbufs proposal, > IO-Lite, and Jonathan's "zbuf" API that he posted to committers are all > more in the range of the type of API I think would work. > > All three of those interfaces are probably superior to mine in terms of the > elegance of the interface. Why not just use those as examples of a zero > copy API? > > The only difference performance-wise between any of those APIs and kblob > would be mapping the data from the user's virtual address space to the > kernel's virtual address space. Even that isn't strictly necessary, see my > comments below. Right -- the `zbuf' API I sent to -committers doesn't even use VM mappings, although that could be added; right now it simply keeps all content in kernel space. -- Jonathan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000619173743.H37084>