[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0c2b2aff-1d9b-5796-2a93-5ffa2f00d6de@fb.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2017 09:09:59 -0700
From: Jens Axboe <axboe@...com>
To: Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
CC: Jes Sorensen <jsorensen@...com>,
Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...lanox.com>,
Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@....mellanox.co.il>,
Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...lanox.com>,
Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>,
Kernel Team <kernel-team@...com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Subject: Re: mlx5 broken affinity
On 11/09/2017 09:01 AM, Sagi Grimberg wrote:
>> Now you try to blame the people who implemented the managed affinity stuff
>> for the wreckage, which was created by people who changed drivers to use
>> it. Nice try.
>
> I'm not trying to blame anyone, really. I was just trying to understand
> how to move forward with making users happy and still enjoy subsystem
> services instead of doing lots of similar things inside mlx5 driver.
Exactly. The key here is how we make it work for both cases. But there
has to be a willingness to make the infrastructure work for that.
--
Jens Axboe
Powered by blists - more mailing lists