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: 1430 bytes --]

On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 10:26:55PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 12:18:47PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 08:52:00PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 11:18:19AM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > > On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 07:58:01AM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > > > > The Collab Summit discussions ended with a general consensus
> > > > > > that some things would go to the driver-specific channel,
> > > > > > while hardware behavior related to the common uAPI would go
> > > > > > through at least a multi-vendor sign off process - like IBTA.
> > > > > 
> > > > > We did ALL and much more from the discussed for RSS patches and
> > > > > at the end, we saw half a word from the maintainer about the
> > > > > future plans for its acceptance.
> > > > 
> > > > Where is the 'multi-vendor sign off' part of the process?
> > > 
> > > The steps are described at the following mail [1].
> > > 
> > > [1] http://marc.info/?l=linux-rdma&m=146218340000784&w=2
> > 
> > None of that is what I mean when I say multi-vendor sign off.
> > 
> > I mean a vote showing multi-vendor participation, or active support
> > from other vendors.
> 
> They participated in OFA/OFAWG/OFVWG and this ML and didn't said no.
> It is more than enough to be convinced.

Sorry for typos,
s/didn't said/didn't say

> 
> > 
> > Jason



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