RE: [NFS] Re: [PATCH] zerocopy NFS for 2.5.36

From: Lever, Charles (
Date: Wed Oct 16 2002 - 09:04:44 EST

> -----Original Message-----
> From: David S. Miller []
> Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2002 12:31 AM
> From: Neil Brown <>
> Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2002 13:44:04 +1000
> Presumably on a sufficiently large SMP machine that this became an
> issue, there would be multiple NICs. Maybe it would make sense to
> have one udp socket for each NIC. Would that make sense? or work?
> It feels to me to be cleaner than one for each CPU.
> Doesn't make much sense.
> Usually we are talking via one IP address, and thus over
> one device. It could be using multiple NICs via BONDING,
> but that would be transparent to anything at the socket
> level.
> Really, I think there is real value to making the socket
> per-cpu even on a 2 or 4 way system.

having a local socket per CPU is very good for SMP scaling.
it multiplies input buffer space, and reduces socket lock
and CPU cache contention.

sorry, i don't have measurements.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Oct 23 2002 - 22:00:28 EST