On 9/13/2014 12:16 AM, Or Gerlitz wrote:
Per your request we provided the information on tests conducted with
the patches.
Note that the patches can't really disrupt existing applications that
don't set the new IB_ACCESS_ON_DEMAND MR flag when they register
memory. Also the whole set of changes
On 9/13/2014 12:16 AM, Or Gerlitz wrote:
Per your request we provided the information on tests conducted with
the patches.
Note that the patches can't really disrupt existing applications that
don't set the new IB_ACCESS_ON_DEMAND MR flag when they register
memory. Also the whole set of changes
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014, Haggai Eran wrote:
> On 04/09/2014, Roland Dreier wrote:
>> Have you done any review or testing of these changes? If so can you
>> share the results?
> We have tested this feature thoroughly inside Mellanox. We ran random
> tests that performed MR registrations, memory
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014, Haggai Eran hagg...@mellanox.com wrote:
On 04/09/2014, Roland Dreier wrote:
Have you done any review or testing of these changes? If so can you
share the results?
We have tested this feature thoroughly inside Mellanox. We ran random
tests that performed MR
On 9/10/2014 11:51 AM, Haggai Eran wrote:
The main benefits of ODP is the simplified programming model, simplified
management, and avoiding worst-case memory commitment.
For example, we were able to run multiple concurrent instances of iSER
targets, allowing over-commitment that otherwise
On 09/09/2014 17:21, Haggai Eran wrote:
> On 04/09/2014 00:15, Roland Dreier wrote:
>> Have you done any review or testing of these changes? If so can you
>> share the results?
>
> We have tested this feature thoroughly inside Mellanox. We ran random
> tests that performed MR registrations,
On 09/09/2014 17:21, Haggai Eran wrote:
On 04/09/2014 00:15, Roland Dreier wrote:
Have you done any review or testing of these changes? If so can you
share the results?
We have tested this feature thoroughly inside Mellanox. We ran random
tests that performed MR registrations, memory
On 9/10/2014 11:51 AM, Haggai Eran wrote:
SNIP
The main benefits of ODP is the simplified programming model, simplified
management, and avoiding worst-case memory commitment.
For example, we were able to run multiple concurrent instances of iSER
targets, allowing over-commitment that otherwise
On 04/09/2014 00:15, Roland Dreier wrote:
> Have you done any review or testing of these changes? If so can you
> share the results?
We have tested this feature thoroughly inside Mellanox. We ran random
tests that performed MR registrations, memory mappings and unmappings,
calls to madvise with
On 04/09/2014 00:15, Roland Dreier wrote:
Have you done any review or testing of these changes? If so can you
share the results?
We have tested this feature thoroughly inside Mellanox. We ran random
tests that performed MR registrations, memory mappings and unmappings,
calls to madvise with
On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 02:15:51PM -0700, Roland Dreier wrote:
> > I would like to note that we at Los Alamos National Laboratory are very
> > interested in this functionality and it would be great if it gets accepted.
>
> Have you done any review or testing of these changes? If so can you
>
On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 02:15:51PM -0700, Roland Dreier wrote:
I would like to note that we at Los Alamos National Laboratory are very
interested in this functionality and it would be great if it gets accepted.
Have you done any review or testing of these changes? If so can you
share the
> I would like to note that we at Los Alamos National Laboratory are very
> interested in this functionality and it would be great if it gets accepted.
Have you done any review or testing of these changes? If so can you
share the results?
- R.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014, Or Gerlitz wrote:
> On 7/3/2014 11:44 AM, Haggai Eran wrote:
>>
>> Hi Roland,
>>
>> I understand that you were reluctant to review these patches as long as
>> there was an ongoing debate on whether or not the i_mmap_mutex should be
>> changed into a spinlock.
>>
>> It seems
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014, Or Gerlitz ogerl...@mellanox.com wrote:
On 7/3/2014 11:44 AM, Haggai Eran wrote:
Hi Roland,
I understand that you were reluctant to review these patches as long as
there was an ongoing debate on whether or not the i_mmap_mutex should be
changed into a spinlock.
It
I would like to note that we at Los Alamos National Laboratory are very
interested in this functionality and it would be great if it gets accepted.
Have you done any review or testing of these changes? If so can you
share the results?
- R.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
16 matches
Mail list logo
