Avi Kivity wrote: > On 08/26/2009 09:42 PM, Gregory Haskins wrote: >> Actually, I have already look at this and it does indeed seem better to >> use switch_mm+gupf() over gup() by quite a large margin. You could then >> couple that with your DMA-engine idea to potentially gain even more >> benefits (though probably not for networking since most NICs have their >> own DMA engine anyway). >> >> > > For tx, we'll just go copyless once we plumb the destructors properly. > But for rx on a shared interface it is impossible to avoid the copy. > You can only choose if you want it done by the cpu or a local dma engine. > > Yep, agree on both counts. -Greg
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
