From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Or Gerlitz Subject: Re: RDMAoE / lossless Ethernet (ewg: SC'09 BOF - Meeting notes) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2009 14:49:24 +0200 Message-ID: <4B336354.2060305@voltaire.com> References: <2ED289D4E09FBD4D92D911E869B97FDD01AF10F2@mtlexch01.mtl.com><4B31D048.5040001@voltaire.com><15ddcffd0912231412y8f6724fh5a7036f30117189e@mail.gmail.com> <2ED289D4E09FBD4D92D911E869B97FDD0222EFDF@mtlexch01.mtl.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <2ED289D4E09FBD4D92D911E869B97FDD0222EFDF-ia22CT07NJfiMCgWhms8HQC/G2K4zDHf@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Liran Liss Cc: Roland Dreier , Or Gerlitz , Yevgeny Petrilin , Richard Frank , Sean Hefty , Linux RDMA list , Paul Grun List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org Liran Liss wrote: > I second... > fair-enough, so now (A) everyone agrees that DCB is good for IBoE and (B) mlx4 supports pfc, any reason not to push the pfc patches into the kernel and have mlx4_en comply with the mainline dcbnl code? > The only way an end-node can cause congestion is if its internal buses don't match the IB link's BW, but this is unrelated to (lack of) transport-level flow control. > thanks for clarifying this Or. -- 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