From: Roland Dreier <rdreier@cisco.com>
To: Hoang-Nam Nguyen <HNGUYEN@de.ibm.com>
Cc: Joachim Fenkes <fenkes@de.ibm.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
LinuxPPC-Dev <linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>,
Christoph Raisch <raisch@de.ibm.com>,
OF-General <general@lists.openfabrics.org>,
Stefan Roscher <stefan.roscher@de.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/10] IB/ehca: Support for multiple event queues
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 20:48:40 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ada1wf7vgfb.fsf@cisco.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <OF2377E85C.B05BDE94-ONC125731A.006E64A7-C125731A.00714F9E@de.ibm.com> (Hoang-Nam Nguyen's message of "Mon, 16 Jul 2007 22:37:44 +0200")
> No, I've no figures to provide here. The background of this dist_eqs
> option is actually to allow us testing across all event queues
> without to change the testcases resp consumers to use certain
> event queue number. Thus, I should comment it as EXPERIMENTAL?
Seems like it's just development/testing code that shouldn't escape
into the wild?
> > I think I would rather hold off on multiple EQs for this merge window
> > and plan on having something really solid and thought-out for 2.6.24.
> Fair enough. However why don't let us gather experience with this
> feature now? Should we remove dist_eqs option for more consistency?
As I said I definitely think the dist_eqs switch doesn't sound like
something we want to expose to people.
With that said I still am not sure about putting the multiple EQs
feature in this release. All the infrastructure is there to make
experimenting with it fairly painless (just the low-level driver needs
to change), and I still haven't seen much code using the feature or
even any anecdotal information about the performance impact.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Roland Dreier <rdreier@cisco.com>
To: Hoang-Nam Nguyen <HNGUYEN@de.ibm.com>
Cc: Christoph Raisch <raisch@de.ibm.com>,
"OF-General" <general@lists.openfabrics.org>,
Joachim Fenkes <fenkes@de.ibm.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"LinuxPPC-Dev" <linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>,
Roland Dreier <rolandd@cisco.com>,
Stefan Roscher <stefan.roscher@de.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/10] IB/ehca: Support for multiple event queues
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 20:48:40 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ada1wf7vgfb.fsf@cisco.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <OF2377E85C.B05BDE94-ONC125731A.006E64A7-C125731A.00714F9E@de.ibm.com> (Hoang-Nam Nguyen's message of "Mon, 16 Jul 2007 22:37:44 +0200")
> No, I've no figures to provide here. The background of this dist_eqs
> option is actually to allow us testing across all event queues
> without to change the testcases resp consumers to use certain
> event queue number. Thus, I should comment it as EXPERIMENTAL?
Seems like it's just development/testing code that shouldn't escape
into the wild?
> > I think I would rather hold off on multiple EQs for this merge window
> > and plan on having something really solid and thought-out for 2.6.24.
> Fair enough. However why don't let us gather experience with this
> feature now? Should we remove dist_eqs option for more consistency?
As I said I definitely think the dist_eqs switch doesn't sound like
something we want to expose to people.
With that said I still am not sure about putting the multiple EQs
feature in this release. All the infrastructure is there to make
experimenting with it fairly painless (just the low-level driver needs
to change), and I still haven't seen much code using the feature or
even any anecdotal information about the performance impact.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-07-17 3:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 55+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-07-12 15:45 [PATCH 00/10] IB/ehca: Multiple Event Queues, MR/MW rework, large page MRs, fixes Joachim Fenkes
2007-07-12 15:45 ` Joachim Fenkes
2007-07-12 15:46 ` [PATCH 01/10] IB/ehca: Support for multiple event queues Joachim Fenkes
2007-07-12 15:46 ` Joachim Fenkes
2007-07-16 16:04 ` Roland Dreier
2007-07-16 16:04 ` Roland Dreier
2007-07-16 20:34 ` Joachim Fenkes
2007-07-16 20:34 ` Joachim Fenkes
2007-07-16 20:37 ` Hoang-Nam Nguyen
2007-07-16 20:37 ` Hoang-Nam Nguyen
2007-07-17 3:48 ` Roland Dreier [this message]
2007-07-17 3:48 ` Roland Dreier
2007-07-17 4:37 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2007-07-17 4:37 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2007-07-17 17:52 ` Roland Dreier
2007-07-17 17:52 ` Roland Dreier
2007-07-17 21:32 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2007-07-17 21:32 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2007-07-19 15:03 ` Hoang-Nam Nguyen
2007-07-19 15:03 ` Hoang-Nam Nguyen
2007-07-17 5:57 ` [ofa-general] " Shirley Ma
2007-07-12 15:47 ` [PATCH 02/10] IB/ehca: Fix HW level autodetection Joachim Fenkes
2007-07-12 15:47 ` Joachim Fenkes
2007-07-12 15:48 ` [PATCH 03/10] IB/ehca: fix memory leak in error path of ehca_get_dma_mr() Joachim Fenkes
2007-07-12 15:48 ` Joachim Fenkes
2007-07-12 15:49 ` [PATCH 04/10] IB/ehca: use common error code mapping instead of specific ones Joachim Fenkes
2007-07-12 15:49 ` Joachim Fenkes
2007-07-16 17:14 ` Roland Dreier
2007-07-16 17:14 ` Roland Dreier
2007-07-16 20:35 ` Joachim Fenkes
2007-07-16 20:35 ` Joachim Fenkes
2007-07-12 15:51 ` [PATCH 05/10] IB/ehca: use #define for "pages per register_rpage" instead of hardcoded value Joachim Fenkes
2007-07-12 15:51 ` Joachim Fenkes
2007-07-12 15:51 ` [PATCH 06/10] IB/ehca: use macro to calculate number of chunks in a mem block Joachim Fenkes
2007-07-12 15:51 ` Joachim Fenkes
2007-07-12 15:52 ` [PATCH 07/10] IB/ehca: MR/MW structure refactoring Joachim Fenkes
2007-07-12 15:52 ` Joachim Fenkes
2007-07-12 15:53 ` [PATCH 08/10] IB/ehca: Restructure ehca_set_pagebuf() Joachim Fenkes
2007-07-12 15:53 ` Joachim Fenkes
2007-07-12 15:53 ` [PATCH 09/10] IB/ehca: Fix warnings issued by checkpatch.pl Joachim Fenkes
2007-07-12 15:53 ` Joachim Fenkes
2007-07-12 15:54 ` [PATCH 10/10] IB/ehca: Support large page MRs Joachim Fenkes
2007-07-12 15:54 ` Joachim Fenkes
2007-07-16 17:37 ` Roland Dreier
2007-07-16 17:37 ` Roland Dreier
2007-07-16 21:11 ` Joachim Fenkes
2007-07-16 21:11 ` Joachim Fenkes
2007-07-17 3:50 ` Roland Dreier
2007-07-17 3:50 ` Roland Dreier
2007-07-17 6:29 ` Joachim Fenkes
2007-07-17 6:29 ` Joachim Fenkes
2007-07-12 17:15 ` [PATCH 00/10] IB/ehca: Multiple Event Queues, MR/MW rework, large page MRs, fixes Roland Dreier
2007-07-12 17:15 ` Roland Dreier
2007-07-13 8:26 ` Joachim Fenkes
2007-07-13 8:26 ` Joachim Fenkes
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=ada1wf7vgfb.fsf@cisco.com \
--to=rdreier@cisco.com \
--cc=HNGUYEN@de.ibm.com \
--cc=fenkes@de.ibm.com \
--cc=general@lists.openfabrics.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
--cc=raisch@de.ibm.com \
--cc=stefan.roscher@de.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.