| To: | jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: SIOCADDMULTI for unicast broken |
| From: | Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Sat, 04 Jan 2003 02:32:54 -0500 |
| Cc: | Donald Becker <becker@xxxxxxxxx>, Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20030103224852.L48869@shell.cyberus.ca> |
| References: | <Pine.LNX.4.44.0301032100340.29812-100000@beohost.scyld.com> <20030103224852.L48869@shell.cyberus.ca> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.2) Gecko/20021202 |
|
I wonder if there are any good uses for more advanced RX filtering that
is beginning to appear. I could certainly imagine an interface that was
a more generic RX filtering interface, and [just by accident] happened
to support existing unicast and multicast rx-mode-related controls. As vendors stuff features onto cards and try to figure out where is the best dividing line between TCP stack acceleration and TCP stack offload, it seems to me that recent cards more often than not have nice RX filtering capabilities. If you look at the world through GigE-colored glasses, the RX filtering picture gets even better. There are some fun SMP implications with flexible enough RX filtering, for example. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Anyone used the RAMIX 4-port adapter?, Ben Greear |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Send-Q not being emptied, Dave Hansen |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: SIOCADDMULTI for unicast broken, jamal |
| Next by Thread: | Re: SIOCADDMULTI for unicast broken, jamal |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |