On Thu, 22 May 2014 14:22:22 +0200 Carsten Andrich <carsten.andrich@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Using positive wording is always a good idea, but packet_mmap.txt > already tricked me into believing that PACKET_TX_RING should be faster > than plain sendto(). The user should be allowed to make an informed > decision, which requires the manpage to tell the (ugly) truth that > sendto() currently outperforms TX_RING. See: https://github.com/netsniff-ng/netsniff-ng/commit/d21b30bd64fdf4e7358037aa2d6f0cea02c49b6e With most recent trafgen using small packets, TX_RING version is faster than sendto(). > > The optimization you refer to is to attach the tx-only packet socket > > to a protocol family that is never observed, so that no packets are > > looped back into the socket on receive. This is a great trick. There > > are probably others. Again, I believe that such details belong more in > > packet_mmap.txt than in the man page. But that is just one opinion, so > > I'll gladly defer to Michael and others on that point. See commit, on how to avoid the packet_rcv() call: https://github.com/netsniff-ng/netsniff-ng/commit/c3602a995b21e8133c7f It differs a little sendto() vs. TX_RING setup. -- Best regards, Jesper Dangaard Brouer MSc.CS, Sr. Network Kernel Developer at Red Hat Author of http://www.iptv-analyzer.org LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/brouer -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
