Liran Liss wrote:
>> all the rdmaoe materials saying the lossless traffic class is a
must, are you saying that this works well also >> without it? then
why from architect point of view you have posed this requirement?
lossless traffic can be achieved today using global pause, for
example. PFC is still important; we will submit initial patches that
support it next wee
Liran, I would say that OTOH global pause isn't the way to go and OTHO
IB RC functions quite bad when many packets are lost. As such RDMAoE
without PFC and mapping priorities into TCs (the Ethernet VLs) isn't
really for production, for any non trivial environment involving more
then one hop. Also, this email is from one month ago, any news on the
patches?
Yevgeny, I took a look, and there are patches to support pfc for the
mlx4_en driver, but they were never submitted upstream, which means that
even if rdmaoe goes upstream, mainline users will not be able even to
really test it. Also, the pfc in these patches configuration seems to
be done with sysfs and not through the Netlink APIs defined in
include/net/dcbnl.c, did you had any specific reason not to integrate
with the mainline method of pfc/tc configuration?
Or.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
