From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 11 May 2002 22:46:05 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 11 May 2002 22:46:05 -0400 Received: from nat-pool-rdu.redhat.com ([66.187.233.200]:28224 "EHLO devserv.devel.redhat.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 11 May 2002 22:46:04 -0400 Date: Sat, 11 May 2002 22:46:04 -0400 From: Pete Zaitcev Message-Id: <200205120246.g4C2k4t04510@devserv.devel.redhat.com> To: "Woodruff, Robert J" Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Tcp/ip offload card driver In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >>Don't forget >>that with 64 bit PCI that the limit of the bus has been raised, and with >>impending technologies like Infiniband and Hypertransport that limit >>will be raised again. > > If people are interesting in discussing ideas on how InfiniBand > networking (sockets direct (SDP) and IP over InfiniBand) should be/could > be implemented and you are planning on attending the Linux Symposium > in Ottawa in June, there is an InfiniBand BOF session where we could > discuss and exchange ideas on this topic. The more people, the merrier, but I am afraid that may subvert the BOF. The problem is that nobody showed any convincing proof that TOE actually works with benchmarks, let alone in the real life. It was all a pretty groundless speculation so far. I was on a conf call a week ago, where a guy said: "We implemented TOE in the NT stack and achieved 100% speed-up", and I was like "huh? and it tells me what? That NT stack was crap to begin with?" I would like to keep the BOF on practical topics of Infiniband implementation in Linux by any means necessary. TOE people are welcome to come back when they have something working, and when we know how fast the regular IP over Infiniband can go. -- Pete