speeding up ugen by an order of magnitude.
Julian Elischer
julian at elischer.org
Wed Jul 7 11:27:26 PDT 2004
On Wed, 7 Jul 2004, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message <20040707091311.GE12877 at cicely12.cicely.de>, Bernd Walter writes:
> >On Tue, Jul 06, 2004 at 04:32:28PM -0700, Julian Elischer wrote:
>
> >What about those options:
> >- limit the allocated memory to the user request so we don't take the
> > whole 128k if not reuired.
> >- Do interleaving with 2 or more xfers if the read request is known to
> > take more xfers.
>
> I would consider ugen to be a primary candidate to use physio like
> I belive scsi-tape drives do ?
I believe that is a good candidate. I considerred this as an option
but I haven't looked to see how compaitble NetBSD physio still is with
our diverged physio. FOr reasns of future co-operation, I'd like to keep
diffs to a minimum. As it is out USB code is VERY close to NetBSD except
for umass.c which is qiite different.
>
> --
> Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
> phk at FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956
> FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
> Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
>
More information about the freebsd-current
mailing list