[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1341924089.27035.7.camel@lb-tlvb-eilong.il.broadcom.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 15:41:29 +0300
From: "Eilon Greenstein" <eilong@...adcom.com>
To: "David Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
cc: meravs@...adcom.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, dmitry@...adcom.com
Subject: Re: [net-next patch v2] bnx2x: Add run-time CNIC support
On Tue, 2012-07-10 at 05:37 -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: "Eilon Greenstein" <eilong@...adcom.com>
> Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 15:33:54 +0300
>
> > On Tue, 2012-07-10 at 05:21 -0700, David Miller wrote:
> >> Make it really dynamic, and properly configurable at run time, so
> >> people don't have to go through hoops to get the "advantages" you
> >> speak so highly of.
> >
> > This is possible for the resources, but not for the latency - we cannot
> > change the HW mode once traffic started to run. Why is that so bad to
> > support Kconfig as a working mode like we did thus far? We are using it
> > specifically for users that wants to optimize the kernel, so Kconfig
> > does not sound that bad in that context.
>
> Sure you can find a way to make this work, you just really aren't
> trying hard enough.
>
> The current situation is a huge and gross hack. I'm not letting you
> continue spreading this disease.
>
> Implement this properly, I really mean it.
>
OK. Since it blocks the ability to add SR-IOV support, is it acceptable
to submit it as constant enabled for PF and disabled for VF (SR-IOV)?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists