[comp.dcom.lans] FDDI chip set

kapoor@wuee1.wustl.edu (Sanjay Kapoor) (12/15/90)

I have a couple a questions related to the SUPERNET chip set. 

Q) Given that SUPERNET does not impose a restriction on the response time of
the interrupt latencies, what are the response times generally preffered?
Of course it does depend on the interrupt priorities, worst case traffic 
patterns of frame arrival etc. Some real numbers is what I am looking for.

Also in terms of performance, is it a good idea to run higher layer protocols
and do SUPERNET housekeeping within the same chip? Higher layer protocols like
say TCP/IP etc?
This is because besides DPC, and Node processor, the third DMA channel that 
RBC services is a chip that processes only the data frames. All control 
frames are routed to the node processor.

Suggestions/advice/Solutions are all greatly welcome.

Thanks

-Sanjay Kapoor
kapoor@wuee1.wustl.edu

my@dtg.nsc.com (Michael Yip) (12/15/90)

kapoor@wuee1.wustl.edu (Sanjay Kapoor) writes:
>I have a couple a questions related to the SUPERNET chip set. 
Good, at least someone is looking at FDDI.  Finally.
I don't know muct about the Supernet chipset but let me try ...
(I just wonder if people from AMD can ask the questions ... :-)

>Q) Given that SUPERNET does not impose a restriction on the response time of
>the interrupt latencies, what are the response times generally preffered?
>Of course it does depend on the interrupt priorities, worst case traffic 
>patterns of frame arrival etc. Some real numbers is what I am looking for.
I am not sure what the "response time of the interrupt latencies" means.  
But let me assume you ask the question this way: "When the station receive
the frame, how long can I wait until I grant the bus to the chipset so that
the chipset can transfer content of the frame to memory?"  Well, that depends
on a few factors.  Data bus width, on chip (or off chip) FIFO length, and
transfer efficency.  Let's assume a data bus width of 32 bits (4 bytes), 
a FIFO of 256 32-bits words.  Also each burst of memory transfer will have
2 cycle overhead (25MHz or 40ns cycle), and 2 cycle for each word and 8 words
max for each bus transfer transaction.  
	256 words = 256x4 bytes = 1K bytes = 1K Byte x 80ns/byte = 82 usec
which means that if somehow data keeps coming in, then the on chip FIFO will
get overflowed in 82usec if the Bus Request is not service within 82usec then
the frame is "losted"!  This will happen when the station is receiving a FDDI
frame with max frame size (4500 bytes) and the system bus is too busy.  That
looks pretty bad, huh?  Well, on the other hand, if the request is also 
serviced, then one max bus transfer transaction is just
	2 + 2 * 8 cycles => 40ns * 18 cycles => 720ns.
And compare that figure to the amount of time the FDDI network takes to
deliver the data (8 words * 4 words/byte * 80ns/byte = 2560ns), that means
the network is using 28% of the bus at most!  And the network "never" flood
a station constainly ('cause of preamble, frame overhead, token, not all
broadcast frame ...).  So don't worry too much, if just do some calculation
before you actually sit down to design an FDDI card.  But the way, 82usec
bus respond time is quite a lot too ask on some bus architecture (say VME?)
and 82usec may be very reasonable on other buses.


>Also in terms of performance, is it a good idea to run higher layer protocols
>and do SUPERNET housekeeping within the same chip? Higher layer protocols like
>say TCP/IP etc?
Depends on what performance you are talking about, as far as a computer system 
is concern, I think that the Node processor should do everything and let the
real system processor do number cunching.  Therefore, protocol processing,
in general, should be done by other processors (say the Node processors).  
However, that might be different if you are talking about router or bridge.
(After all those systems are doing protocol processing to earn their $)


>This is because besides DPC, and Node processor, the third DMA channel that 
>RBC services is a chip that processes only the data frames. All control 
>frames are routed to the node processor.
Not sure what you mean by "control frames".  Are you refering to the FDDI
draft Station Management (SMT) type of frames?  Well, if you are on a "cheap"
system, you might want to have your system processor do the SMT frame 
processing.  SMT frames, hopefully, do not happen too often.  The standard
requires at least one SMT frame (NIF, SIF) to be transmitted every 30 secs,
that is not too much to ask for in a station that use FDDI, isn't it? 
SMT only kicks into action if "something happened" on the network so it is/was
designed not to use up too much processing time.  If the chipset is 
reasonablely implemented, SMT will not be a high overhead on the system.
But, I still think that a Node processor is a good idea even on cheap and
small systems.


>Suggestions/advice/Solutions are all greatly welcome.
Well, I typed a lot but I don't even know if I am answering the questions ;)

Have fun and send me mail if you need any help.

-- Mike Yip
   my@dtg.nsc.com

PS: National Semiconductor Corp also manufactor FDDI chipset too.
    Give them a call to compare between the two chipsets' design.
    Call 408 721-3848.  Sorry, this sounds like marketing.

ananth@hpindda.cup.hp.com (AP Anantharaman) (12/18/90)

/ hpindda:comp.dcom.lans / kapoor@wuee1.wustl.edu (Sanjay Kapoor) /  2:27 pm  Dec 14, 1990 /


What is this SUPERNET chipset ?  Who manufactures them ?  Are there any FDDI
cards made with this chipset ?

ananth@hpda

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have a couple a questions related to the SUPERNET chip set. 

Q) Given that SUPERNET does not impose a restriction on the response time of
the interrupt latencies, what are the response times generally preffered?
Of course it does depend on the interrupt priorities, worst case traffic 
patterns of frame arrival etc. Some real numbers is what I am looking for.

Also in terms of performance, is it a good idea to run higher layer protocols
and do SUPERNET housekeeping within the same chip? Higher layer protocols like
say TCP/IP etc?
This is because besides DPC, and Node processor, the third DMA channel that 
RBC services is a chip that processes only the data frames. All control 
frames are routed to the node processor.

Suggestions/advice/Solutions are all greatly welcome.

Thanks

-Sanjay Kapoor
kapoor@wuee1.wustl.edu
----------

my@dtg.nsc.com (Michael Yip) (12/19/90)

In article <3530009@hpindda.cup.hp.com> ananth@hpindda.cup.hp.com (AP Anantharaman) writes:

>What is this SUPERNET chipset ?  Who manufactures them ?  Are there any FDDI
>cards made with this chipset ?

Well, SUPERNET chipset is a FDDI PHY/MAC/SYS implementation by AMD.
The DP83200 chipset is another FDDI PHY/MAC/SYS implementation by National Semi
AT&T also make a PHY layer only chip.

-- Mike
   my@dtg.nsc.com