On 11/02/2012 09:21 AM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 03:05:56PM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 11:18:09AM -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote:
>>> On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 10:19 AM, Alexander Duyck
>>> wrote:
While working on 10Gb/s routing pe
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 03:05:56PM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 11:18:09AM -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 10:19 AM, Alexander Duyck
> > wrote:
> > > While working on 10Gb/s routing performance I found a significant amount
> > > of
> > >
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 11:18:09AM -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 10:19 AM, Alexander Duyck
> wrote:
> > While working on 10Gb/s routing performance I found a significant amount of
> > time was being spent in the swiotlb DMA handler. Further digging found that
> > a
> > s
On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 10:19 AM, Alexander Duyck
wrote:
> While working on 10Gb/s routing performance I found a significant amount of
> time was being spent in the swiotlb DMA handler. Further digging found that a
> significant amount of this was due to virtual to physical address translation
> a
While working on 10Gb/s routing performance I found a significant amount of
time was being spent in the swiotlb DMA handler. Further digging found that a
significant amount of this was due to virtual to physical address translation
and calling the function that did it. It accounted for nearly 60% o
5 matches
Mail list logo
