From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "David S. Miller" Subject: Re: The ultimate TOE design Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 13:53:08 -0700 Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com Message-ID: <20040915135308.78bf74f0.davem@davemloft.net> References: <4148991B.9050200@pobox.com> <1095275660.20569.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: paul@clubi.ie, netdev@oss.sgi.com, leonid.grossman@s2io.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Return-path: To: Alan Cox In-Reply-To: <1095275660.20569.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 20:14:22 +0100 Alan Cox wrote: > On Mer, 2004-09-15 at 21:04, Paul Jakma wrote: > > The intel IXP's are like the above, XScale+extra-bits host-on-a-PCI > > card running Linux. Or is that what you were referring to with > > " but they are all fairly expensive."? > > Last time I checked 2Ghz accelerators for intel and AMD were quite cheap > and also had the advantage they ran user mode code when idle from > network processing. ROFL, and this is my position on this topic as well. There are absolutely no justified economics in these TOE engines. By the time you deploy them, the cpus and memory catch up and what's more those are general purpose and not just for networking as David Stevens and others have said. TOE is just junk, and we'll reject any attempt to put that garbage into the kernel.