linux-kernel - Re: [Scst-devel] Fwd: Re: linuxcon 2010...

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4C72CEE4.7020104@vlnb.net>
Date:	Mon, 23 Aug 2010 23:41:24 +0400
From:	Vladislav Bolkhovitin <vst@...b.net>
To:	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...e.de>
CC:	Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>,
	Dirk Meister <dmeister@...-paderborn.de>,
	linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, Chetan Loke <chetanloke@...il.com>,
	Chetan Loke <generationgnu@...oo.com>,
	scst-devel <scst-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Scst-devel] Fwd: Re: linuxcon 2010...

James Bottomley, on 08/23/2010 12:29 AM wrote:
> So the phrase "up to GigE" was deliberately in the above to exclude the
> disputed infiniband results.  I'm not really interested in re-opening
> the arguments over how to interpret those results.  The fact that SCST
> and STGT were on par up to 1GbE is enough to refute the contention that
> STGT is "fundamentally slow".

Well, James, why not 100MbE? If you want a comparison of target 
implementations you need a fast hardware with minimal latency. 
Otherwise, the difference between the implementations can drown in the 
overhead of the accompanying processing. 1GbE is a nearly 10 years ago 
interface. Or are we going to stay ten years behind progress?

Thanks,
Vlad
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/