On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 03:53:07PM +0300, Yevgeny Kliteynik wrote: > >I would be very surprised if any implementation had a significant > >overhead for the actual set operation compared to the packet handling > >path. Certainly in our products the incremental cost of a set vs > >processing a DR is negligible. I expect similar results from any > >switch. As soon as a SMP goes into the CPU for DR or other processing > >there is an enormous hit. > > Whether the DR packets forwarding is done in HW, FW or SW is > implementation dependent. I agree with you that if the same > entity is processing LFT block set and DR MAD forwarding, then > the difference between these two operations would not be very > big (having said that, I'm not sure it's negligible - again, > it's implementation dependent). > > I don't know about all the IB switches, but in InfiniScale IV > (and any InfiniScaleIV-based switches out there) DR packets > forwarding is done in HW, so its significantly faster than > processing LFT block by the SMA.
Yes, this is sort of what worries me.. Tuning/testing for these kind of switches can horribly break on other switches that have low limits on DR SMP processing. Jason _______________________________________________ general mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
