From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756195AbYDCLka (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Apr 2008 07:40:30 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754391AbYDCLkU (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Apr 2008 07:40:20 -0400 Received: from mu-out-0910.google.com ([209.85.134.184]:39154 "EHLO mu-out-0910.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754367AbYDCLkS (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Apr 2008 07:40:18 -0400 Message-ID: <47F4C21A.6090402@mellanox.co.il> Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2008 14:40:10 +0300 Reply-To: tziporet@dev.mellanox.co.il Organization: Mellanox Technologies User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.14 (Windows/20071210) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Roland Dreier CC: tziporet@dev.mellanox.co.il, general@lists.openfabrics.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [ofa-general] InfiniBand/iWARP/RDMA merge plans for 2.6.26 (what's in infiniband.git) References: <47F37CA4.8000109@mellanox.co.il> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Tziporet Koren Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Roland Dreier wrote: > Send with invalidate should be OK. Let's see about the masked atomics > stuff -- we have a ton of new verbs and I think we might want to slow > down and make sure it all makes sense. > OK - will send and then we will see what will come out. > > What about the split CQ for UD mode? It's improved the IPoIB > > performance for small messages significantly. > > Oh yeah... I'll try to get that in too. > thanks > > mlx4- we plan to send patches for the low level driver only to enable > > mlx4_en. These only affect our low level driver. > > No problem in principle, let's see the actual patches. > Sure > > I think we should try to push for XEC in 2.6.26 since there are > > already MPI implementation that use it and this ties them to use OFED > > only. > > Also this feature is stable and now being defined in IBTA > > Not taking it causing changes between OFED and the kernel and your > > libibverbs and we wish to avoid such gaps. > > Is there any thing we can do to help and make it into 2.6.26? > > I don't have a good feeling that the user-kernel interface is well > thought out, so I want to consider XRC + ehca LL stuff + new iWARP verbs > and make sure we have something that makes sense for the future. > > I see - but can't we figure this all for the 2.6.26 window? Tziporet