From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+w=401wt.eu-S1755218AbYHMUXd@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1755218AbYHMUXd (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 13 Aug 2008 16:23:33 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752891AbYHMUXT
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Wed, 13 Aug 2008 16:23:19 -0400
Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:46026
	"EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-OK)
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752675AbYHMUXS (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 13 Aug 2008 16:23:18 -0400
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 13:23:19 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <20080813.132319.175666454.davem@davemloft.net>
To: vst@vlnb.net
Cc: open-iscsi@googlegroups.com, rdreier@cisco.com, rick.jones2@hp.com,
       jgarzik@pobox.com, swise@opengridcomputing.com, kxie@chelsio.com,
       netdev@vger.kernel.org, michaelc@cs.wisc.edu, daisyc@us.ibm.com,
       wenxiong@us.ibm.com, bhua@us.ibm.com, dm@chelsio.com,
       leedom@chelsio.com, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/1] cxgb3i: cxgb3 iSCSI initiator
From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
In-Reply-To: <48A32976.7060504@vlnb.net>
References: <20080812.150246.42068558.davem@davemloft.net>
	<200808121521.10101.divy@chelsio.com>
	<48A32976.7060504@vlnb.net>
X-Mailer: Mew version 5.2 on Emacs 22.1 / 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
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

From: Vladislav Bolkhovitin <vst@vlnb.net>
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 22:35:34 +0400

> This is because the target sends data in a zero-copy manner, so its
> CPU is capable to deal with the load, but on the initiator there are
> additional data copies from skb's to page cache and from page cache
> to application.

If you've actually been reading at all what I've been saying in this
thread you'll see that I've described a method to do this copy
avoidance in a completely stateless manner.

You don't need to implement a TCP stack in the card in order to do
data placement optimizations.  They can be done completely stateless.

Also, large portions of the cpu overhead are transactional costs,
which are significantly reduced by existing technologies such as
LRO.