• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: IP over FireWire Performance
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: IP over FireWire Performance


  • Subject: Re: IP over FireWire Performance
  • From: Wade Tregaskis <email@hidden>
  • Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2003 15:15:31 +1000

Any ideas as to why the FireWire throughput isn't higher? I've read that it "can reserve up to 80% ... for one or more isochronous channels." Does this mean I should never expect better than 640Mbps? Any ideas why the FireWire receiver would consume so much more cpu in the kernel_task as compared to Ethernet? May it be caused by differences in interrupt handling or DMA support? I would expect Ethernet and FireWire to perform similarly in hardware considering both PHYs connect to the U2 controller.

I'm not a driver or Firewire expert, so this is only my [slightly] educated guess, but I'd say there are two primary problems here:

a) The firewire controller doesn't have all the extra capabilities of the ethernet controller, so there's probably quite a few things being done in software 'emulation', if you like. Plus, it's probably tuned for moving a hand full of very large blocks, not thousands of tiny ones*

b) The drivers simply aren't as tuned as those for the ethernet device. Remember that most of Darwin's ethernet code is probably derived almost entirely from well-tested, well-optimised code in the various BSD's. Apple have, from what I can gather, written the majority of their IP over Firewire driver from scratch. Probably borrowing from the ethernet interface code, certainly, but there will undoubtedly be a lot more the IP over Firewire driver has to do (like emulating certain things normally done in hardware, as mentioned, for example).

* = Why the heck does TCP still use 1500 MTU's? Shouldn't the packet size have scaled along with the bandwidth? Surely the original packet size was chosen to provide best performance on the first networks... why should it not be changed as appropriate for newer networks?

Wade Tregaskis
-- Sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
_______________________________________________
macnetworkprog mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives: http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/macnetworkprog
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.

References: 
 >IP over FireWire Performance (From: Chris Irvine <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: IP over FireWire Performance
  • Next by Date: Configuring Airport For Multiple Hotspots
  • Previous by thread: IP over FireWire Performance
  • Next by thread: Re: IP over FireWire Performance
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread