From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: The ultimate TOE design
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 14:29:26 -0700
Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com
Message-ID: <20040915142926.7bc456a4.davem@davemloft.net>
References: <4148991B.9050200@pobox.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0409152102050.23011@fogarty.jakma.org>
	<1095275660.20569.0.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4148A90F.80003@pobox.com>
	<20040915140123.14185ede.davem@davemloft.net>
	<20040915210818.GA22649@havoc.gtf.org>
	<20040915141346.5c5e5377.davem@davemloft.net>
	<4148B2E5.50106@pobox.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, paul@clubi.ie, netdev@oss.sgi.com,
        leonid.grossman@s2io.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Return-path: <netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com>
To: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>
In-Reply-To: <4148B2E5.50106@pobox.com>
Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com
List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org

On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 17:23:49 -0400
Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com> wrote:

> The typical definition of TOE is "offload 90+% of the net stack", as 
> opposed to "TCP assist", which is stuff like TSO.

I think a better goal is "offload 90+% of the net stack cost" which
is effectively what TSO does on the send side.

This is why these discussions are so circular.

If we want to discuss something specific, like receive offload
schemes, that is a very different matter.  And I'm sure folks
like Rusty have a lot to contribute in this area :-)