Re: Direct Copying To Share Memory In NDIS ProtocolReceive
- From: "Don Burn" <burn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 4 Mar 2007 21:02:51 -0500
"Le Chaud Lapin" <jaibuduvin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
If I was in the OP's place, if would first try to do everything "stupid
and
simple", and see how it all works - I wold start thinking about
optimization
if and only if I am not happy with the performance. However, the OP
starts
thinking about it in the very beginning of his project.
That is the way I work. I think about the end result, then spend much
time thinking about how I can get there without doing anything. I
mull, which is what I am doing now.
According to Knuth, " in 95% of cases optimization is mother of all
evil". I
think that there is a good chance that the OP's case falls into these
95%
Actually, I believe Knuth said "Premature optimization is the root of
all evil." In this case, the optimization is not premature, any more
than considerations of optimization would be premature in the design
of a hash-based associative set. The whole reason for even considering
the design I had in mind was optimization. So in this case, my form
is driven by optimization. If the goal where simply to receive and
transmit packets, I would have just done that.
But you are right, I definitely should consider whether it is worth
deviating from something "normal", which is why I was trying to get an
indication of how much performance increase I could expect on packet
receive indications.
Well all I can say is for small transfers like packet size data, I have
never seen an increase for anyone who has played these games. I have seen
a decrease in most cases of 10 to 30 percent or more, since they have
overhead on keeping track of things that overrides the improvements.
Now, on huge transfers (things like 4MB packets and 20 or more of those a
second) it can make a difference, but network traffic doesn't make that
model.
Personally, I believe Anton's advice is absolutely correct, do it simple
and clean. Then you can experiment, remember even if it is faster, unless
it is significant you have to trade that off against the likely decrease in
reliability you are creating for the system.
--
Don Burn (MVP, Windows DDK)
Windows 2k/XP/2k3 Filesystem and Driver Consulting
Website: http://www.windrvr.com
Blog: http://msmvps.com/blogs/WinDrvr
Remove StopSpam to reply
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Direct Copying To Share Memory In NDIS ProtocolReceive
- From: Anton Bassov
- Re: Direct Copying To Share Memory In NDIS ProtocolReceive
- References:
- Direct Copying To Share Memory In NDIS ProtocolReceive
- From: Le Chaud Lapin
- Re: Direct Copying To Share Memory In NDIS ProtocolReceive
- From: Thomas F. Divine
- Re: Direct Copying To Share Memory In NDIS ProtocolReceive
- From: Le Chaud Lapin
- Re: Direct Copying To Share Memory In NDIS ProtocolReceive
- From: Thomas F. Divine
- Re: Direct Copying To Share Memory In NDIS ProtocolReceive
- From: Le Chaud Lapin
- Re: Direct Copying To Share Memory In NDIS ProtocolReceive
- From: Thomas F. Divine
- Re: Direct Copying To Share Memory In NDIS ProtocolReceive
- From: Anton Bassov
- Re: Direct Copying To Share Memory In NDIS ProtocolReceive
- From: Le Chaud Lapin
- Direct Copying To Share Memory In NDIS ProtocolReceive
- Prev by Date: Re: About mixture of drivers and Applications
- Next by Date: can i use Unclassified Signature in DTM submission for my Smart Card Reader?
- Previous by thread: Re: Direct Copying To Share Memory In NDIS ProtocolReceive
- Next by thread: Re: Direct Copying To Share Memory In NDIS ProtocolReceive
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|