Advice on a multithreaded netisr patch?

[Barney Cordoba]

--- On Sun, 4/5/09, Kevin Oberman <oberman at es.net> wrote:

> From: Kevin Oberman <oberman at es.net>
> Subject: Re: Advice on a multithreaded netisr patch?
> To: barney_cordoba at yahoo.com
> Cc: "Ivan Voras" <ivoras at freebsd.org>, "Robert Watson" <rwatson at FreeBSD.org>, freebsd-net at freebsd.org
> Date: Sunday, April 5, 2009, 5:24 PM
> > Date: Sun, 5 Apr 2009 10:25:41 -0700 (PDT)
> > From: Barney Cordoba <barney_cordoba at yahoo.com>
> > Sender: owner-freebsd-net at freebsd.org
> > 
> > 
> > As an aside, why is Kip doing development on a Chelsio
> card rather
> > than a more mainstream product such as Intel or
> Broadcom that would
> > generate more widespread interest?
> 
> Because Chelsio pays him better than the makers of the
> "more mainstream"
> products. And, at 10GE, Chelsio and Myricom seem to have
> stronger
> products than others. (Just my opinion and not that of The
> US Dept. of
> Energy, The university of California, or Lawrence Berkeley
> National
> Labs.)

Sadly thats the small picture view that has plagued freebsd for
the longest time. The bigger picture is that big OEMs aren't going
to use chelsio cards, and big OEMs running FreeBSD instead of linux
mean more testers, more hardware, more code give-backs and more 
money for the project.

You don't really know how good or bad intel or broadcom is because
you don't have good drivers for the cards. Unfortunately Intel does
things ass-backwards, by putting out crap "sample" drivers that make
their cards look like garbage. Maybe they are garbage, but you think
 they'd be a bit smarter. They can certainly afford more than Chelsio.

Barney