From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 20 Jan 2001 20:29:46 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 20 Jan 2001 20:29:36 -0500 Received: from oldftp.webmaster.com ([209.10.218.74]:49810 "EHLO shell.webmaster.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 20 Jan 2001 20:29:30 -0500 From: "David Schwartz" To: "Linus Torvalds" Cc: Subject: RE: Is sendfile all that sexy? Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001 17:29:29 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Importance: Normal Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > I'm _not_ seeing the point for a high-performance link to have a generic > packet buffer. > > Linus Well suppose your RAID controller can take over control of disks distributed throughout your I/O subsystem. If you assume the bandwidth of the I/O subsystem is not the limiting factor, there's no need to hang the disks directly off the RAID controller. This makes even more sense if your computer can upload code to your peripherals which they can then run autonomously. Imagine if your filesystem code is mobile and can reside (perhaps to a variable extent) in your drives if you want it to. Of course none of this really relates to the case of the OS trying to get peripherals to talk to each other directly. DS - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/