linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Roland Dreier <rdreier@cisco.com>
To: Hoang-Nam Nguyen <HNGUYEN@de.ibm.com>
Cc: Joachim Fenkes <fenkes@de.ibm.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	LinuxPPC-Dev <linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>,
	Christoph Raisch <raisch@de.ibm.com>,
	OF-General <general@lists.openfabrics.org>,
	Stefan Roscher <stefan.roscher@de.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/10] IB/ehca: Support for multiple event queues
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 20:48:40 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ada1wf7vgfb.fsf@cisco.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <OF2377E85C.B05BDE94-ONC125731A.006E64A7-C125731A.00714F9E@de.ibm.com> (Hoang-Nam Nguyen's message of "Mon, 16 Jul 2007 22:37:44 +0200")

 > No, I've no figures to provide here. The background of this dist_eqs
 > option is actually to allow us testing across all event queues
 > without to change the testcases resp consumers to use certain
 > event queue number. Thus, I should comment it as EXPERIMENTAL?

Seems like it's just development/testing code that shouldn't escape
into the wild?

 > > I think I would rather hold off on multiple EQs for this merge window
 > > and plan on having something really solid and thought-out for 2.6.24.

 > Fair enough. However why don't let us gather experience with this
 > feature now? Should we remove dist_eqs option for more consistency?

As I said I definitely think the dist_eqs switch doesn't sound like
something we want to expose to people.

With that said I still am not sure about putting the multiple EQs
feature in this release.  All the infrastructure is there to make
experimenting with it fairly painless (just the low-level driver needs
to change), and I still haven't seen much code using the feature or
even any anecdotal information about the performance impact.

  reply	other threads:[~2007-07-17  3:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-07-12 15:45 [PATCH 00/10] IB/ehca: Multiple Event Queues, MR/MW rework, large page MRs, fixes Joachim Fenkes
2007-07-12 15:46 ` [PATCH 01/10] IB/ehca: Support for multiple event queues Joachim Fenkes
2007-07-16 16:04   ` Roland Dreier
2007-07-16 20:34     ` Joachim Fenkes
2007-07-16 20:37     ` Hoang-Nam Nguyen
2007-07-17  3:48       ` Roland Dreier [this message]
2007-07-17  4:37         ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2007-07-17 17:52           ` Roland Dreier
2007-07-17 21:32             ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2007-07-19 15:03             ` Hoang-Nam Nguyen
2007-07-17  5:57         ` [ofa-general] " Shirley Ma
2007-07-12 15:47 ` [PATCH 02/10] IB/ehca: Fix HW level autodetection Joachim Fenkes
2007-07-12 15:48 ` [PATCH 03/10] IB/ehca: fix memory leak in error path of ehca_get_dma_mr() Joachim Fenkes
2007-07-12 15:49 ` [PATCH 04/10] IB/ehca: use common error code mapping instead of specific ones Joachim Fenkes
2007-07-16 17:14   ` Roland Dreier
2007-07-16 20:35     ` Joachim Fenkes
2007-07-12 15:51 ` [PATCH 05/10] IB/ehca: use #define for "pages per register_rpage" instead of hardcoded value Joachim Fenkes
2007-07-12 15:51 ` [PATCH 06/10] IB/ehca: use macro to calculate number of chunks in a mem block Joachim Fenkes
2007-07-12 15:52 ` [PATCH 07/10] IB/ehca: MR/MW structure refactoring Joachim Fenkes
2007-07-12 15:53 ` [PATCH 08/10] IB/ehca: Restructure ehca_set_pagebuf() Joachim Fenkes
2007-07-12 15:53 ` [PATCH 09/10] IB/ehca: Fix warnings issued by checkpatch.pl Joachim Fenkes
2007-07-12 15:54 ` [PATCH 10/10] IB/ehca: Support large page MRs Joachim Fenkes
2007-07-16 17:37   ` Roland Dreier
2007-07-16 21:11     ` Joachim Fenkes
2007-07-17  3:50       ` Roland Dreier
2007-07-17  6:29         ` Joachim Fenkes
2007-07-12 17:15 ` [PATCH 00/10] IB/ehca: Multiple Event Queues, MR/MW rework, large page MRs, fixes Roland Dreier
2007-07-13  8:26   ` Joachim Fenkes

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=ada1wf7vgfb.fsf@cisco.com \
    --to=rdreier@cisco.com \
    --cc=HNGUYEN@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=fenkes@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=general@lists.openfabrics.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
    --cc=raisch@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=stefan.roscher@de.ibm.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).