From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] net-tcp: TCP/IP stack bypass for loopback connections Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2012 15:41:03 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <20120920.154103.310589245720062013.davem@davemloft.net> References: <505AFDE9.4080602@earthlink.net> <1348141871.31352.66.camel@edumazet-glaptop> <505B5154.3020002@hp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: eric.dumazet@gmail.com, sclark46@earthlink.net, brutus@google.com, edumazet@google.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: rick.jones2@hp.com Return-path: Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([149.20.54.216]:38842 "EHLO shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756102Ab2ITTlF (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Sep 2012 15:41:05 -0400 In-Reply-To: <505B5154.3020002@hp.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Rick Jones Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2012 10:24:36 -0700 > On 09/20/2012 04:51 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote: >> On Thu, 2012-09-20 at 07:28 -0400, Stephen Clark wrote: >>> >>> Does this mean traffic on the loopback interface will not traverse >>> netfilter? >>> >> >> Yes this was already mentioned. >> >> Only the SYN / SYNACK messages will >> >> All data will bypass IP stack, qdisc (if any), loopback driver, and >> netfilter. > > Does that then lift the tent flap for TOE? As I recall, TOE's > bypassing of all those things is one of the reasons used to reject > TOE. Wrong. This bypassing is completely in software, and completely controlled by us. Which is completely opposite to TOE. Don't spread fud like this, even on a whim.