Thunderbolt Networking Support Is Still Being Worked On For Linux

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Thunderbolt Networking Support Is Still Being Worked On For Linux

Thunderbolt networking support is still being worked on for the mainline Linux kernel...

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Thunderbolt-Networking-Linux

[uid313]

I already have Ethernet.
Ethernet also have the advantage of being more secure as it does not have direct memory access (DMA).

[starshipeleven]

I already have Ethernet.
Ethernet also have the advantage of being more secure as it does not have direct memory access (DMA).

This is mostly for high-end tablets and other devices whose only meaningful port is a thunderbolt.

[uid313]

This is mostly for high-end tablets and other devices whose only meaningful port is a thunderbolt.

I thought a tablet would be more likely to have a USB port than a Thunderbolt port.
Most tablets are ARM and I don't think there is any Thunderbolt-equipped ARM device.
Most smartphones and tablets seems to heading toward USB Type-C.

[johnc]

I already have Ethernet.
Ethernet also have the advantage of being more secure as it does not have direct memory access (DMA).

10 Gbps ethernet is still pretty expensive though.

[schmidtbag]

I really don't understand why Intel has let Thunderbolt continue for as long as they have, especially since it competes with their own technologies (like USB). There are hardly any compatible devices worth considering, it has been littered with problems in both Mac and Windows, and the hardware evolves so quickly that it isn't really worth buying anything for it. Also, it seems to be less common than eSATA, which is saying a lot. It had some interesting potential, with things like external GPUs or daisy chaining a single cable for all external devices. But that stuff just didn't take off.

Thunderbolt is effectively the successor to Firewire, and somehow Intel didn't realize that Firewire died off because nobody cared about it.

[duby229]

I really don't understand why Intel has let Thunderbolt continue for as long as they have, especially since it competes with their own technologies (like USB). There are hardly any compatible devices worth considering, it has been littered with problems in both Mac and Windows, and the hardware evolves so quickly that it isn't really worth buying anything for it. Also, it seems to be less common than eSATA, which is saying a lot. It had some interesting potential, with things like external GPUs or daisy chaining a single cable for all external devices. But that stuff just didn't take off.

Thunderbolt is effectively the successor to Firewire, and somehow Intel didn't realize that Firewire died off because nobody cared about it.

I'm pretty certain Thunderbolt only exists because Apple. They have a long history of ignoring standards and trying to do there own thing.

[Michael_S]

I'm pretty certain Thunderbolt only exists because Apple. They have a long history of ignoring standards and trying to do there own thing.

I agree. My understanding is that this is just an attempt by Apple to get more money from their customers.

Get the new Apple ______ with a Thunderbolt port! Then in order to take advantage of its amazing technology, you need to buy a Thunderbolt display. But most monitors don't have Thunderbolt support, so you'll probably spend 60% more for an Apple Thunderbolt monitor than you would with an equivalent HDMI monitor! Hurray for our bottom line!

However, I'm glad it exists. I bet the USB 3 and 3.1 standards would not have improved so rapidly or come to market in consumer products so quickly if Thunderbolt did not exist to make USB 2.0 look pathetic.

[schmidtbag]

I'm pretty certain Thunderbolt only exists because Apple. They have a long history of ignoring standards and trying to do there own thing.

Yes, you're probably right. Firewire I think was also because of Apple, though companies like Sony tried to mooch off of it too. What I don't get is why they involved Intel.

However, I'm glad it exists. I bet the USB 3 and 3.1 standards would not have improved so rapidly or come to market in consumer products so quickly if Thunderbolt did not exist to make USB 2.0 look pathetic.

USB 3.0 was inevitable, and was long overdue. USB 3.1 I'm not too fond of, since it's specs are a little too dynamic. Specifically, the power distribution. It seems incredibly stupid to me to have something that can vary between 5W to 100W. It's an unnecessary complication that will not solve anything. For example: if you have a full-size external hard drive, a desktop computer with USB 3.1 could probably power it just fine, but a laptop running on battery probably can't. So, you still need the hardware to connect an external power source whether your device can power it by itself or not. Therefore, manufacturers are not saving any money on reducing parts. If anything, they're paying more money since they need to add more logic.

Also to my recollection, it's the voltage that varies. What if the controller miscalculates and applies too much voltage? Or too little? What if a device overloads the voltage regulator and it can't measure the output properly? Such dynamic voltage control seems needlessly dangerous to me. Remember - not everyone is going to use high-quality components. USB is the de-facto peripheral port, and people will want to find the cheapest ways to operate it. And don't forget - this is meant for the general public. Users are going to get confused and frustrated when their high-powered USB 3.1 device isn't turning on when they plug it into their tablet.

[andrei_me]

Is this patches for older Thunderbolt (1 & 2) or for the Thunderbolt 3? Thunderbolt 3 uses USB type C connector, so it is not the new DOA Firewire anymore