Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 09:00:23 +0200 From: sthaug@nethelp.no To: tom@sdf.com Cc: ccsanady@scl.ameslab.gov, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, matt@3am-software.com Subject: Re: Network concurrency problems!? Message-ID: <6925.866703623@verdi.nethelp.no> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 18 Jun 1997 18:16:49 -0700 (PDT)" References: <Pine.BSF.3.95q.970618181004.11965A-100000@misery.sdf.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > There has been a good deal of debate on whether offloading is really the > > best idea for network protocol implementations. A lot of people have tried > > it, and a lot of people have failed. If you look at Van Jacobson't work > > you'll find him arguing in the opposite direction: A "stupid" (in reality: > > simple and efficient) controller, and a very efficient protocol stack > > implementation. > > Not really what I was refering to. I was thinking about controllers > that minimize interupt calls, use DMA, avoid PIO, and align data > transfered to the host. With the possible exception of the data alignment issue, which of these do you think are *not* used by the 100 Mbps cards supported by FreeBSD? (I mention the alignment issue because the DEC 21040 used to have a problem here. Not sure if the 21140 has the same problem.) Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug@nethelp.no
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?6925.866703623>