From: Avi Kivity <avi@argo.co.il>
To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
Cc: Andreas Hartmann <andihartmann@01019freenet.de>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: More performance for the TCP stack by using additional hardware chip on NIC
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 13:29:14 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1113733753.15803.26.camel@avik.scalemp> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1113728880.17394.16.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org>
On Sun, 2005-04-17 at 12:07, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Sun, 2005-04-17 at 10:17 +0200, Andreas Hartmann wrote:
> > Hello!
> >
> > Alacritech developed a new chip for NIC's
> > (http://www.alacritech.com/html/tech_review.html), which makes it possible
> > to take away the TCP stack from the host CPU. Therefore, the host CPU has
> > more performance for the applications according Alacritech.
>
> there are very many good reasons why this for linux is not the right
> solution, including the fact that the linux tcp/ip stack already is
> quite fast so the "gains" achieved aren't that stellar as the gains you
> get when comparing to windows.
>
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.
> Also these types of solution always add quite a bit of overhead to
> connection setup/teardown making it actually a *loss* for the "many
> short connections" types of workloads. Now guess which things certain
> benchmarks use, and guess what real world servers do :)
>
again, this depends on the application.
a copyless solution is probably necessary to achieve 10Gb/s speeds.
Avi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-04-17 10:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-04-17 8:17 Andreas Hartmann
2005-04-17 9:07 ` Arjan van de Ven
2005-04-17 10:29 ` Avi Kivity [this message]
2005-04-17 10:57 ` Arjan van de Ven
2005-04-17 12:32 ` Avi Kivity
2005-04-17 11:30 ` Willy Tarreau
2005-04-17 12:15 ` Avi Kivity
2005-04-17 19:43 ` Bernd Eckenfels
2005-04-17 20:36 ` David S. Miller
2005-04-18 5:35 ` Avi Kivity
2005-04-17 23:37 ` Horst von Brand
2005-04-18 4:08 ` Kyle Moffett
2005-04-18 4:28 ` Willy Tarreau
[not found] <3Udkm-7rV-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <3Ue6L-867-19@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <3Ufm9-IB-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <3Ugid-1w6-25@gated-at.bofh.it>
2005-04-17 19:04 ` Andreas Hartmann
2005-04-18 8:27 ` Denis Vlasenko
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1113733753.15803.26.camel@avik.scalemp \
--to=avi@argo.co.il \
--cc=andihartmann@01019freenet.de \
--cc=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®