From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: Early SPECWeb99 results on 2.5.33 with TSO on e1000
Date: Fri, 06 Sep 2002 12:01:04 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com
Message-ID: <20020906.120104.125944656.davem@redhat.com>
References: <20020906.114815.127906065.davem@redhat.com>
	<E17nOQ8-0003a8-00@w-gerrit2>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Martin.Bligh@us.ibm.com, hadi@cyberus.ca, tcw@tempest.prismnet.com,
   linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@oss.sgi.com, niv@us.ibm.com
Return-path: <netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com>
To: gh@us.ibm.com
In-Reply-To: <E17nOQ8-0003a8-00@w-gerrit2>
Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com
List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org

   From: Gerrit Huizenga <gh@us.ibm.com>
   Date: Fri, 06 Sep 2002 12:05:27 -0700
   
   So, any comments I made which might have implied that Tux/Tux2 made things
   worse have no substantiated data to prove that and it is quite possible
   that there is no such problem.  Also, this was run nearly a year ago and
   the state of Tux/Tux2 might have been a bit different at the time.

Thanks for clearing things up.