Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] TTY: tty flip buffer optimisation.

From: Alan Cox
Date: Mon Nov 14 2011 - 10:04:18 EST


> Hi, the results are indeed nice. However is there any *real* load other
> than this tailor-made microbenchmark where the added code complexity is
> worth it?

I'm wondering if we need the complexity in the first place. Certainly 256
does seem a bit small for pty/tty traffic. A 'real world' benchmark would
be an ls -lR / on a machine with a fast graphics card or in console mode

ie

ls -lR / # prime cache
time ls -lR /

and there are cases where people do a lot of traffic over a pty like this
so I don't think it's entirely fake.

I don't like the complexity but we could certainly go from using 256 byte
buffers to "tty->buf.bufsize" and make it configurable without
that complexity.

Alan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/