From: Eric Van Hensbergen <ericvh@gmail.com>
To: "Ronald G. Minnich" <rminnich@lanl.gov>
Cc: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Subject: Re: [9fans] 8c question
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 16:13:26 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <a4e6962a050711141315e4eca5@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0507111508210.14780@enigma.lanl.gov>
On 7/11/05, Ronald G. Minnich <rminnich@lanl.gov> wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 11 Jul 2005, Eric Van Hensbergen wrote:
>
> > But I thought that was the whole point - to convince them to use 9P for
> > resource sharing versus the current stuff. Using 9P for transport alone
> > just doesn't make sense to me -- let's sell them the whole enchilada.
>
> you'll lose on the performance front. I'd still like to be able to walk to
> a resource in the kernel and get a channel for it, and then use channel
> reads and writes in the kernel to write the fifo queues.
>
With the new v9fs 2.1 server architecture, I should be able to go zero
copy all the way and match their performance -- at least that's the
plan.
>
> Right now, you use a dedicated driver (which is how you name it -- you
> know the driver to use) and drive the fifo queues.
>
I know, I think that sucks. No reason this can't be unified. The
performance sensative bits are always reads and writes -- if you can
avoid copies, and I think we can -- particularly over a shared memory
interface, then you should have equivilent performance -- just in a
unified, easy to manage wrapper -- plus we'll have built in fail-over
semantics for certain resources with Gorka's new recover stuff.
-eric
prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-07-11 21:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-07-01 23:17 Tim Newsham
2005-07-02 12:43 ` Charles Forsyth
2005-07-05 2:36 ` David Leimbach
2005-07-05 14:47 ` Ronald G. Minnich
2005-07-05 15:27 ` Latchesar Ionkov
2005-07-05 15:33 ` Ronald G. Minnich
2005-07-05 18:33 ` Tim Newsham
2005-07-05 15:35 ` David Leimbach
2005-07-07 23:08 ` Charles Forsyth
2005-07-08 0:06 ` Ronald G. Minnich
2005-07-08 0:27 ` Russ Cox
2005-07-08 14:36 ` Ronald G. Minnich
2005-07-08 19:03 ` jmk
2005-07-08 19:40 ` Charles Forsyth
2005-07-09 1:02 ` Ronald G. Minnich
2005-07-08 3:31 ` Tim Newsham
2005-07-08 11:14 ` Charles Forsyth
2005-07-09 1:04 ` Tim Newsham
2005-07-09 9:40 ` Charles Forsyth
2005-07-11 0:57 ` Ronald G. Minnich
2005-07-11 1:26 ` [9fans] Xen comms Tim Newsham
2005-07-11 19:21 ` Eric Van Hensbergen
2005-07-11 19:23 ` [9fans] 8c question Eric Van Hensbergen
2005-07-11 19:58 ` Ronald G. Minnich
2005-07-11 20:05 ` Eric Van Hensbergen
2005-07-11 20:15 ` Ronald G. Minnich
2005-07-11 20:35 ` Eric Van Hensbergen
2005-07-11 20:38 ` Ronald G. Minnich
2005-07-11 21:03 ` Eric Van Hensbergen
2005-07-11 21:09 ` Ronald G. Minnich
2005-07-11 21:13 ` Eric Van Hensbergen [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=a4e6962a050711141315e4eca5@mail.gmail.com \
--to=ericvh@gmail.com \
--cc=9fans@cse.psu.edu \
--cc=rminnich@lanl.gov \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).