netdev - Re: OFT - reserving CPU's for networking

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: <20100501105304.GA9434@gargoyle.fritz.box>
Date:	Sat, 1 May 2010 12:53:04 +0200
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	tglx@...utronix.de, shemminger@...tta.com, eric.dumazet@...il.com,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, peterz@...radead.org
Subject: Re: OFT - reserving CPU's for networking

> And we don't want it to, because the decision mechanisms for steering
> that we using now are starting to get into the stateful territory and
> that's verbotton for NIC offload as far as we're concerned.

Huh? I thought full TCP offload was forbidden?[1] Statefull as in NIC 
(or someone else like netfilter) tracking flows is quite common and very far 
from full offload. AFAIK it doesn't have near all the problems full
offload has.

-Andi

[1] although it seems to leak in more and more through the RDMA backdoor.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html