Re: [PATCH V1 for-next 1/2] IB/core: Report LSO capabilities when querying device

[Leon Romanovsky <leon-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1327 bytes --]

On Mon, May 09, 2016 at 10:35:37AM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Mon, May 09, 2016 at 09:27:32AM -0500, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> > On Fri, 6 May 2016, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > 
> > > > > This is where I get upset with the process we are following here,
> > > > > without input from other hardware architects in other companies,
> > > > > it is hard to design something truly common.
> > > >
> > > > Presumably the other vendors are listening in on this conversation. The
> > > > lack of alternate proposals and objections by them has often been
> > > > considered silent approval in the past.
> > >
> > > I know the various hardware architects that would be involved with a
> > > IBTA process/etc do not monitor this list.
> > 
> > An IBTA process? How would that be relevant here?
> 
> What do you mean? IBTA is the only multi-vendor body left working on
> standardizing the hardware specification for verbs.
> 
> These various recent patches are adding new hardware features to
> verbs.

These patches are exporting hardware capabilities and not "adding new
hardware features".

> 
> If you want hardware knowledgeable people to help, then you need to go
> to the forums they are active in.

It doesn't make sense to look after these people who have no interest in
linux RDMA at all.

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]