From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S270443AbTGMXUf (ORCPT ); Sun, 13 Jul 2003 19:20:35 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S270441AbTGMXUf (ORCPT ); Sun, 13 Jul 2003 19:20:35 -0400 Received: from smtp.bitmover.com ([192.132.92.12]:36241 "EHLO smtp.bitmover.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S270434AbTGMXUd (ORCPT ); Sun, 13 Jul 2003 19:20:33 -0400 Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2003 16:35:03 -0700 From: Larry McVoy To: "David S. Miller" Cc: Roland Dreier , alan@storlinksemi.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-net@vger.kernel.org, netdev@oss.sgi.com Subject: Re: TCP IP Offloading Interface Message-ID: <20030713233503.GA31793@work.bitmover.com> Mail-Followup-To: Larry McVoy , "David S. Miller" , Roland Dreier , alan@storlinksemi.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-net@vger.kernel.org, netdev@oss.sgi.com References: <20030713004818.4f1895be.davem@redhat.com> <52u19qwg53.fsf@topspin.com> <20030713160200.571716cf.davem@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030713160200.571716cf.davem@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam (whitelisted), SpamAssassin (score=0.5, required 7, AWL, DATE_IN_PAST_06_12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Jul 13, 2003 at 04:02:00PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote: > On send this doesn't matter, on receive you use my clever receive > buffer handling + flow cache idea to accumulate the data portion of > packets into page sized chunks for the networking to flip. Please don't. I think page flipping was a bad idea. I think you'd be better off to try and make the data flow up the stack in small enough windows that it all sits in the cache. One thing SGI taught me (not that they wanted to do so) is that infinitely large packets are infinitely stupid, for lots of reasons. One is that you have to buffer them somewhere and another is that the bigger they are the bigger your cache needs to be to go fast. -- --- Larry McVoy lm at bitmover.com http://www.bitmover.com/lm