| To: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: The ultimate TOE design |
| From: | Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 15 Sep 2004 18:31:12 -0400 |
| Cc: | alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, paul@xxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, leonid.grossman@xxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20040915141346.5c5e5377.davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| 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> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040803 |
David S. Miller wrote: Plus we have things like TSO too but that doesn't require a full Linux instance to realize on a networking port. Simple silicon implements this already. I don't see how that differs from your "big MTU" ideas. WRT MTU: if the card is a buffering endpoint, rather than a passthrough, the card deals with Path MTU and fragmentation, leaving the card<->host MTU at 64K, getting nice big fat frames.
Jeff
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: The ultimate TOE design, Jeff Garzik |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: The ultimate TOE design, Paul Jakma |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: The ultimate TOE design, Jörn Engel |
| Next by Thread: | Re: The ultimate TOE design, Michael Richardson |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |