From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Leon Romanovsky Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] nvmet-rdma: SRQ per completion vector Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2017 14:52:29 +0200 Message-ID: <20171118125229.GT18825@mtr-leonro.local> References: <1510852885-25519-1-git-send-email-maxg@mellanox.com> <263c6c9d-0dd2-da4f-12a9-efefd361e592@grimberg.me> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Max Gurtovoy Cc: Sagi Grimberg , hch-jcswGhMUV9g@public.gmane.org, linux-nvme-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, vladimirk-VPRAkNaXOzVWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org, idanb-VPRAkNaXOzVWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org, RDMA mailing list List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 09:32:42PM +0200, Max Gurtovoy wrote: > > > On 11/16/2017 8:36 PM, Sagi Grimberg wrote: > > > > > Since there is an active discussion regarding the CQ pool > > > architecture, I decided to push > > > this feature (maybe it can be pushed before CQ pool). > > > > > > This is a new feature for NVMEoF RDMA target, > > > > Any chance having this for the rest? isert, srpt, svcrdma? > > > > We can implement it for isert, but I think it's better to see how the CQ > pool will be defined first. > It can bring a big benefit and improvement for ib_srpt (similar to NVMEoF > target) but I'm not sure if I can commit for that one soon.. Too bad, but I don't see inclusion of generic SRQ pool code in RDMA subsystem without actual conversion of existing ULP clients. Thanks -- 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