From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jamal Subject: Re: [PATCH] NET: Multiqueue network device support. Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2007 17:30:08 -0400 Message-ID: <1181770208.4065.40.camel@localhost> References: <1181737935.4050.87.camel@localhost> <18031.60741.695897.572432@robur.slu.se> <1181741602.4050.116.camel@localhost> <20070613.112017.130846513.davem@davemloft.net> Reply-To: hadi@cyberus.ca Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Robert.Olsson@data.slu.se, yi.zhu@intel.com, Leonid.Grossman@neterion.com, kaber@trash.net, peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@intel.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, jeff@garzik.org, auke-jan.h.kok@intel.com To: David Miller Return-path: Received: from py-out-1112.google.com ([64.233.166.180]:22065 "EHLO py-out-1112.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753707AbXFMVaM (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Jun 2007 17:30:12 -0400 Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id a29so592309pyi for ; Wed, 13 Jun 2007 14:30:11 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20070613.112017.130846513.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2007-13-06 at 11:20 -0700, David Miller wrote: > From: jamal > Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2007 09:33:22 -0400 > > > So in such a case (assuming 8 rings), One model is creating 4 netdev > > devices each based on single tx/rx ring and register set and then > > having a mother netdev (what you call the bond) that feeds these > > children netdev based on some qos parametrization is very sensible. > > Why all of this layering and overhead for something so > BLOODY SIMPLE?!?!? Are we still talking about the same thing?;-> This was about NICs which have multi register sets, tx/rx rings; the only shared resource is the bus and the wire. The e1000 cant do that. The thread is too long, so you may be talking about the same thing. cheers, jamal