From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Or Gerlitz Subject: Re: RFC: Immediate data support for SRP Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2015 18:26:53 +0300 Message-ID: <55AD133D.2040204@mellanox.com> References: <55A7CCF1.3080201@sandisk.com> <55ABCB34.1000506@dev.mellanox.co.il> <55ACC2FA.8030202@dev.mellanox.co.il> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <55ACC2FA.8030202-LDSdmyG8hGV8YrgS2mwiifqBs+8SCbDb@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Sagi Grimberg , Or Gerlitz Cc: Bart Van Assche , "linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On 7/20/2015 12:44 PM, Sagi Grimberg wrote: > On 7/20/2015 12:43 AM, Or Gerlitz wrote: >> On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 7:07 PM, Sagi Grimberg >> wrote: >>> On 7/16/2015 6:25 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote: >> >>> I agree it would definitely help as the lack of immediate data >>> emphasizes the additional latency of doing rdma reads. >> >> Sagi, do we have black box evidence from iSER showing notable >> (results? setup?) IO latency improvement from using immediate data vs. >> RDMA read? > > I've seen it. The LIO target has a better write performance due to > ImmediateData. Numberz, please... Also, do you see any gain with TGT too? if not, what's you thinking re the LIO vs TGT difference? > I also have a patch in the pipe that optimize the this flow at the > target side which improves up to 40% for 512B-8K IOs. > So you have 140% better IOPS with immediate-data vs. non immediate data?! numberz? 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