netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Bonding-devel] Re: [RFC][bonding] Improve VLAN support on top of bo

To: Dan Hollis <goemon@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Bonding-devel] Re: [RFC][bonding] Improve VLAN support on top of bonding
From: Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 11:13:58 -0700
Cc: Shmulik Hen <shmulik.hen@xxxxxxxxx>, bond-devel <bonding-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-net <linux-net@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-netdev <netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx>, Jay Vosburgh <fubar@xxxxxxxxxx>, Amir Noam <amir.noam@xxxxxxxxx>, Noam Marom <noam.marom@xxxxxxxxx>, Tsippy Mendelson <tsippy.mendelson@xxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0307151054350.5112-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Organization: Candela Technologies
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0307151054350.5112-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030529
Dan Hollis wrote:
On Tue, 15 Jul 2003, Ben Greear wrote:

I'd consider ignoring the HW accel unless you can prove it actually helps
performance to a noticeable degree.  I have never seen results of any 
benchmarking
related to this...


For gigabit ethernet, it makes a *H*U*G*E* difference.

I'm curious to see numbers.  The VLAN shim is only inserting
a small shim header, at at most shifting the first part of the packet
when sent a pre-built packet.

Maybe the hw-accel turns on tcp checksumming or something too??


-Dan


--
Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>       <Ben_Greear AT excite.com>
President of Candela Technologies Inc      http://www.candelatech.com
ScryMUD:  http://scry.wanfear.com     http://scry.wanfear.com/~greear



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>