The Linux Kernel Mailing List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Denis Vlasenko <vda@ilport.com.ua>
To: Andreas Hartmann <andihartmann@01019freenet.de>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: More performance for the TCP stack by using additional hardware chip on NIC
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 11:27:30 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200504181127.30821.vda@ilport.com.ua> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d3ubvt$1ra$1@pD9F878E4.dip0.t-ipconnect.de>

On Sunday 17 April 2005 22:04, Andreas Hartmann wrote:
> Willy Tarreau schrieb:
> > Well, if the application does not touch most of the data, either it
> > is playing as a relay, and the data will at least have to be copied,
> > or it will play as a client or server which reads from/writes to disk,
> > and in this case, I wonder how the NIC will send its writes directly
> > to the disk controller without some help.

If both NIC and disk is clever enough, they can both use DMA:
NIC ==dma==> RAM ==dma==> DISK
without CPU needing to ever touch the bulk of data.

> > What worries me with those NICs is that you have no control on the
> > TCP stack. You often have to disable the acceleration when you
> > want to insert even 1 firewall rule, use policy routing or even
> > do a simple anti-spoofing check. It is exactly like the routers
> > which do many things in hardware at wire speed, but jump to snail
> > speed when you enable any advanced feature.

Yes. This is why TCP offload is a buzzword mostly.
Anybody with real experience on this?

> Alacritech says, the hardware solution would make it very easy for the
> application, because _every_ application would gain, without considering
> the hardware it runs on itself. These are things which CEO's like to hear
> - because they think, they could save time and money during development of
> the application.

Most probably marketspeak.

> I don't think that it must be a problem, that on the hardware TCP stack
> doesn't run any filter or other additional functions, because machines
> (often clusters) with high workloads usually run on dedicated servers with
> other dedicated firewall machines in front of.

If you put firewall machine in front of your 10GigE server, you
are killing its performance.

> I think it would be good to support this hardware, because the user can
> decide afterwards (after testing), which is the best choice for his
> specific application and workload.

Are specs available?
--
vda


  reply	other threads:[~2005-04-18  8:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [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       ` More performance for the TCP stack by using additional hardware chip on NIC Andreas Hartmann
2005-04-18  8:27         ` Denis Vlasenko [this message]
2005-04-17  8:17 Andreas Hartmann
2005-04-17  9:07 ` Arjan van de Ven
2005-04-17 10:29   ` Avi Kivity
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

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=200504181127.30821.vda@ilport.com.ua \
    --to=vda@ilport.com.ua \
    --cc=andihartmann@01019freenet.de \
    --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