From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 6 Sep 2002 14:51:02 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 6 Sep 2002 14:51:02 -0400 Received: from pizda.ninka.net ([216.101.162.242]:14471 "EHLO pizda.ninka.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 6 Sep 2002 14:51:01 -0400 Date: Fri, 06 Sep 2002 11:48:15 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <20020906.114815.127906065.davem@redhat.com> To: Martin.Bligh@us.ibm.com Cc: gh@us.ibm.com, hadi@cyberus.ca, tcw@tempest.prismnet.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@oss.sgi.com, niv@us.ibm.com Subject: Re: Early SPECWeb99 results on 2.5.33 with TSO on e1000 From: "David S. Miller" In-Reply-To: <61930391.1031313088@[10.10.2.3]> References: <20020906.113611.102227888.davem@redhat.com> <61930391.1031313088@[10.10.2.3]> X-Mailer: Mew version 2.1 on Emacs 21.1 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: "Martin J. Bligh" Date: Fri, 06 Sep 2002 11:51:29 -0700 I see no reason why turning on NAPI should make the Apache setup we have perform worse ... quite the opposite. Yes, we could use Tux, yes we'd get better results. But that's not the point ;-) Of course. I just don't want propaganda being spread that using Tux means you lose any sort of web server functionality whatsoever.