From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dmitry Yusupov Subject: Re: [Ksummit-2005-discuss] Summary of 2005 Kernel Summit Proposed Topics Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 14:05:13 -0800 Message-ID: <1112306713.4613.15.camel@beastie> References: <20050329152008.GD63268@muc.de> <1112116762.5088.65.camel@beastie> <1112130512.1077.107.camel@jzny.localdomain> <20050330152208.GB12672@muc.de> <20050330153313.GD32111@g5.random> <20050330153948.GE12672@muc.de> <20050330154418.GE32111@g5.random> <20050330160255.GG12672@muc.de> <20050330161522.GH32111@g5.random> <20050331115012.GP24804@muc.de> <20050331170923.GA6546@g5.random> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Andi Kleen , jamal , James Bottomley , Rik van Riel , mpm@selenic.com, michaelc@cs.wisc.edu, ksummit-2005-discuss@thunk.org, netdev Return-path: To: open-iscsi@googlegroups.com In-Reply-To: <20050331170923.GA6546@g5.random> Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2005-03-31 at 19:09 +0200, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > > Even with all that work it is not the 100% solution some people on this thread > > seem to be lusting for. > > I thought it was more than enough, all they care about is not to > deadlock anymore, I don't think anybody cares about the performance of > the deadlock-scenario. True. this is all we need to make "soft" iSCSI viable alternative to FC. Btw, other OSes can do that today. > I agree with Jamal that his suggestion to use an high-per ring is > very good (I didn't even know some card supported this feature), so if > somebody wants the deadlock scenario not to run in "degraded mode", they > will have to use some more advanced hardware the way Jamal is suggesting > (or get rid of TCP all together and use TCP/IP offload with the security > risks it introduces or RDMA or whatever other point to point high perf > DMA technology like quadrix etc..). One good example is Neterion 10Gbps card. It supports up to 8 priority rings. Could someone point me to the API which driver could utilize to configure ring's priorities with 2.6.x? Thanks.