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, 10 May 2002 11:19:50 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 10 May 2002 11:19:49 -0400 Received: from pizda.ninka.net ([216.101.162.242]:32704 "EHLO pizda.ninka.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 10 May 2002 11:19:45 -0400 Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 08:07:25 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <20020510.080725.94585622.davem@redhat.com> To: jgarzik@mandrakesoft.com Cc: chen_xiangping@emc.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Tcp/ip offload card driver From: "David S. Miller" In-Reply-To: <3CDBE34A.8050806@mandrakesoft.com> 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: Jeff Garzik Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 11:12:10 -0400 Linux TCP implementation will always be more powerful and more flexible than any NIC, too. I doubt they have netlink and netfilter on NICs, for example :) It has the same problem as proprietary implementations of the BSD stack, same bugs and same enhancements done N-times instead of once. Anyone who thinks that having a different TCP implementation on each different kind of network card installed on your system is sane, would you please pass it on brotha so I can smoke some of it too! :-) On a more serious note, it might be at some level considerable (the maintainence nightmare et al.) if there was some real life demonstrable performance gain with current systems. For example, do a SpecWEB run with TUX both using on-chip-TCP and without, same networking card. Show a demonstrable gain from the on-chip-TCP implementation. I bet you can't. If you can make such a claim using a setup that other people could reproduce themselves by buying your card and running the test, I'll eat all of my words.