From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [PATCH] NET: Multiqueue network device support. Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2007 11:20:17 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <20070613.112017.130846513.davem@davemloft.net> References: <1181737935.4050.87.camel@localhost> <18031.60741.695897.572432@robur.slu.se> <1181741602.4050.116.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii 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: hadi@cyberus.ca Return-path: Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:58127 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758790AbXFMSUD (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Jun 2007 14:20:03 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1181741602.4050.116.camel@localhost> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org 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?!?!?