On Sun, 2005-04-17 at 13:57, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > > > TOEs can remove the data copy on receive. In some applications (notably > > storage), where the application does not touch most of the data, this is > > a significant advantage that cannot be achieved in a software-only > > solution. > > other solutions can too. Search the archives for posts from Dave Miller > and Jeff Garzik on these issues. Note that TOEs per se don't do this, > specific treats of interfaces to TOE *may* allow this. The interesting > part is that the parts of the interface that would allow this can be > implemented without TOE (and all the downsides of full TOE such as > bypassing firewall rules etc etc) just as well. >
I see. if you are referring to Willy's trick in the other post, then I agree. it has still more overhead than full offload, so only measurements can tell if it is enough (and, of course, need to wait for the hardware to materialize). > > a copyless solution is probably necessary to achieve 10Gb/s speeds. > > I've heard the same say abot 100Mbit and 1Gbit. And neither has been > proven true. Don't get me wrong, avoiding copies is always nice, and on > sending linux already enables that (depending on the applications > capabilities). But I personally find it hard to accept that full > copyless operation is a strict requirement to achieve 10Gb/s. > > What sure will be required to achieve efficient 10Gb/s performance is a > whole lot of tuning in the network stack and potentially even in the > tcp/ip layer to allow for bigger buffers etc. But I'm pretty sure that > effort is underway already or will be soon... > amen. Avi - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
