From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jason Gunthorpe Subject: Re: [PATCH] An argument for allowing applications to manually send RMPP packets if desired Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2011 21:42:51 -0600 Message-ID: <20110917034251.GA6056@obsidianresearch.com> References: <4C2744E8AD2982428C5BFE523DF8CDCB4A5387E899@MNEXMB1.qlogic.org> <20110912172334.GC18574@obsidianresearch.com> <20110912190623.GD18574@obsidianresearch.com> <4C2744E8AD2982428C5BFE523DF8CDCB4A5387ECDF@MNEXMB1.qlogic.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4C2744E8AD2982428C5BFE523DF8CDCB4A5387ECDF-amwN6d8PyQWXx9kJd3VG2h2eb7JE58TQ@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Mike Heinz Cc: Roland Dreier , "linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , Todd Rimmer List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 01:28:16PM -0500, Mike Heinz wrote: > The patch at hand avoids all that complexity by simply allowing the SM > application handle RMPP itself in whatever manner is considered best. If > the SM wants to use the current RMPP implementation it can, turning this > ability on is completely optional. I agree, this is a good idea. Allowing the SM to control the RMPP entirely, and amortize the content generation across the entire query is a very good way to manage many of the issues with a RMPP heavy work load. Ultimately I think the scalable/compatible answer is to move these RMPP work loads to a verbs QP and we need to have a user space RMPP implementation for that anyhow. Jason -- 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