[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <adaabtuo0n9.fsf@cisco.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 20:23:38 -0700
From: Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>
To: "Or Gerlitz" <or.gerlitz@...il.com>
Cc: "Sean Hefty" <mshefty@...ips.intel.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, general@...ts.openfabrics.org
Subject: Re: [ofa-general] Further 2.6.23 merge plans...
> > But to be fair, it will be difficult to enable both QoS and local PR
> > caching. To me, this would be the strongest reason against using it.
> > However, QoS places additional burden on the SA, which will make scaling
> > even more challenging.
>
> my understanding is that the local sa does a path-query where all the fields
> except for the SGID are wildcard-ed. This means we expect the result to be a
> table of all the paths from this port to every other port on the fabrics for
> every pkey which this port is a member of etc, correct?
>
> How do you plug here the QoS concept of SID in the path query? are you
> expecting the SA to realize what are all the services for which this port is
> a "member"? does the proposed definision for QoS management at the SA
> defines "services per gids" isn't it "what SL to user per Service"?
Or, thanks for rescuing this post.
I think this is an important question. If we merge the local SA
stuff, then are we creating a problem for dealing with QoS? Are we
going to have to revert the local SA stuff once the QoS stuff is
available? Or is there at least a sketch of a plan on how to handle
this?
- R.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists