Re: [ANNOUNCE] SRP: ProfitBricks publishes its SRP Initiator patches

[Sebastian Riemer <sebastian.riemer-EIkl63zCoXaH+58JC4qpiA@public.gmane.org>]

Hi Vasiliy,

sorry for the late reply! I was ill last week.

The main difference so far is that my patches are much easier to
understand as I don't provide back-porting and also don't put
performance improvements in between the stability fixes. I provide full
test cases + scripts which makes it simple to check if you've got the
expected/same behavior. Everything is straight forward and completely
described in the commit messages.

My work focuses on using ib_srp without the srp_tools. Just fast IO
failing + reconnect. No performance improvements. We gradually find
compromises to get a cool solution. We've e.g. agreed on detecting
connection loss upon the QP timeout only.

Today I'll release our own automatic reconnect.

Sorry Bart, but a reconnect with just the commit message
"IB/srp: Add kernel-level transport layer recovery" and no further
description isn't very trustworthy for me. I also wonder why you need so
much locking.

Cheers,
Sebastian


On 03.05.2013 14:27, Vasiliy Tolstov wrote:
> 
> 03.05.2013 15:45 пользователь "Bart Van Assche" <bvanassche-HInyCGIudOg@public.gmane.org
> <mailto:bvanassche-HInyCGIudOg@public.gmane.org>> написал:
>>
>> On 04/30/13 09:34, Vasiliy Tolstov wrote:
>>>
>>> What is main difference between bvanassche repo and sriemer ?
>>
>>
>> Good question. As soon as I have the time I will try to find a single
> approach that works for everyone and post a new patch series for review
> on the linux-rdma mailing list such that these can be included in the
> mainline kernel.
>>
>> Bart.
> 
> Thats very good! Thans! I'm already using 3.8 with you patches and all
> works very stable.
> 

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html