| To: | Rick Jones <rick.jones2@xxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [RFC] netif_rx: receive path optimization |
| From: | Nivedita Singhvi <niv@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 31 Mar 2005 16:30:25 -0800 |
| Cc: | netdev <netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <424C8790.6060203@hp.com> |
| References: | <20050330132815.605c17d0@dxpl.pdx.osdl.net> <20050331120410.7effa94d@dxpl.pdx.osdl.net> <1112303431.1073.67.camel@jzny.localdomain> <424C6A98.1070509@hp.com> <1112305084.1073.94.camel@jzny.localdomain> <424C7CDC.8050801@hp.com> <424C81B8.6090709@us.ibm.com> <424C8790.6060203@hp.com> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20041217 |
Rick Jones wrote: Well, I'm in an email discussion with someone who seems to bump their TCP windows quite large, and disable timestamps...
BTW what is the real world purpose of having the multiple CPU affinity of NIC interrupts? I have to admit it seems rather alien to me. (In the context of no onboard NIC smarts being involved that is)
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [RFC] netif_rx: receive path optimization, Stephen Hemminger |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [RFC] netif_rx: receive path optimization, Rick Jones |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [RFC] netif_rx: receive path optimization, Rick Jones |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [RFC] netif_rx: receive path optimization, jamal |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |