| To: | Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: The ultimate TOE design |
| From: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 15 Sep 2004 14:29:26 -0700 |
| Cc: | alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, paul@xxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, leonid.grossman@xxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <4148B2E5.50106@xxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <4148991B.9050200@xxxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.61.0409152102050.23011@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1095275660.20569.0.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4148A90F.80003@xxxxxxxxx> <20040915140123.14185ede.davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20040915210818.GA22649@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20040915141346.5c5e5377.davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4148B2E5.50106@xxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 17:23:49 -0400 Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > The typical definition of TOE is "offload 90+% of the net stack", as > opposed to "TCP assist", which is stuff like TSO. I think a better goal is "offload 90+% of the net stack cost" which is effectively what TSO does on the send side. This is why these discussions are so circular. If we want to discuss something specific, like receive offload schemes, that is a very different matter. And I'm sure folks like Rusty have a lot to contribute in this area :-) |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: The ultimate TOE design, Imran Badr |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: The ultimate TOE design, Wes Felter |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: The ultimate TOE design, Jeff Garzik |
| Next by Thread: | Re: The ultimate TOE design, Jeff Garzik |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |