Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261291AbVDQJOo (ORCPT ); Sun, 17 Apr 2005 05:14:44 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261288AbVDQJOo (ORCPT ); Sun, 17 Apr 2005 05:14:44 -0400 Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:24510 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261295AbVDQJID (ORCPT ); Sun, 17 Apr 2005 05:08:03 -0400 Subject: Re: More performance for the TCP stack by using additional hardware chip on NIC From: Arjan van de Ven To: Andreas Hartmann Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 11:07:59 +0200 Message-Id: <1113728880.17394.16.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.4 (2.0.4-2) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 3.7 (+++) X-Spam-Report: SpamAssassin version 2.63 on pentafluge.infradead.org summary: Content analysis details: (3.7 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 1.1 RCVD_IN_DSBL RBL: Received via a relay in list.dsbl.org [] 2.5 RCVD_IN_DYNABLOCK RBL: Sent directly from dynamic IP address [80.57.133.107 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net] 0.1 RCVD_IN_SORBS RBL: SORBS: sender is listed in SORBS [80.57.133.107 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net] X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by pentafluge.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1080 Lines: 25 On Sun, 2005-04-17 at 10:17 +0200, Andreas Hartmann wrote: > Hello! > > Alacritech developed a new chip for NIC's > (http://www.alacritech.com/html/tech_review.html), which makes it possible > to take away the TCP stack from the host CPU. Therefore, the host CPU has > more performance for the applications according Alacritech. there are very many good reasons why this for linux is not the right solution, including the fact that the linux tcp/ip stack already is quite fast so the "gains" achieved aren't that stellar as the gains you get when comparing to windows. Also these types of solution always add quite a bit of overhead to connection setup/teardown making it actually a *loss* for the "many short connections" types of workloads. Now guess which things certain benchmarks use, and guess what real world servers do :) - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/