From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rick Jones Subject: Re: RDMA will be reverted Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 09:29:11 -0700 Message-ID: <44C646D7.3040701@hp.com> References: <44C565D1.6070202@hp.com> <20060724.174518.52116903.davem@davemloft.net> <44C56BFC.7080000@hp.com> <20060724.182108.37154478.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: ak@suse.de, rdreier@cisco.com, tom@opengridcomputing.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, akpm@osdl.org Return-path: Received: from palrel13.hp.com ([156.153.255.238]:19114 "EHLO palrel13.hp.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964786AbWGYQ3T (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Jul 2006 12:29:19 -0400 To: David Miller In-Reply-To: <20060724.182108.37154478.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org David Miller wrote: > From: Rick Jones > Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2006 17:55:24 -0700 > > >>Even enough bits for 1024 or 2048 CPUs in the single system image? I have seen >>1024 touted by SGI, and with things going so multi-core, perhaps 16384 while >>sounding initially bizzare would be in the realm of theoretically possible >>before tooooo long. > > > Read the RSS NDIS documents from Microsoft. I'll see about hunting them down. > You aren't going to want > to demux to more than, say, 256 cpus for single network adapter even > on the largest machines. I suppose, it just seems to tweak _small_ alarms in my intuition - maybe because it still sounds like networking telling the scheduler where to run threads of execution, and even though I'm a networking guy I seem to have the notion that it should be the other way 'round. >>That would cover TCP, are there similarly fungible fields in SCTP or >>other ULPs? And if we were to want to get HW support for the thing, >>getting it adopted in a de jure standards body would probably be in >>order :) > > > Microsoft never does this, neither do we. LRO came out of our own > design, the network folks found it reasonable and thus they have > started to implement it. The same is true for Microsofts RSS stuff. > > It's a hardware interpretation, therefore it belongs in a driver API > specification, nowhere else. It may be a hardware interpretation, but doesn't it have non-trivial system implications - where one runs threads/processes etc? rick jones