From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andi Kleen Subject: Re: [Ksummit-2005-discuss] Summary of 2005 Kernel Summit Proposed Topics Date: 31 Mar 2005 20:59:54 +0200 Message-ID: <20050331185954.GR24804@muc.de> References: <20050330161522.GH32111@g5.random> <20050331114122.GL24804@muc.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Alex Aizman , open-iscsi@googlegroups.com, "'jamal'" , "'Dmitry Yusupov'" , "'James Bottomley'" , mpm@selenic.com, michaelc@cs.wisc.edu, ksummit-2005-discuss@thunk.org, "'netdev'" Return-path: Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 20:59:54 +0200 To: Rik van Riel Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Thu, Mar 31, 2005 at 07:12:22AM -0500, Rik van Riel wrote: > On Thu, 31 Mar 2005, Andi Kleen wrote: > > > It wont work - I can guarantee you that if you add a limit like > > "we only support 8 iscsi connections max" then users/customers will raise > > hell because it does not fit their networks. > > What would prevent the iscsi driver from telling the network > stack to increase the size of the mempools when additional > iscsi connections are configured ? I was talking about the hardware limits for early filtering, not the size of the mempools. All hardware I found so far has small limits like this. -Andi