On 09:02 Wed 09 Jun , Hal Rosenstock wrote: > > > > All those SMPs are equivalent in processing, etc., the only difference > > is in MADs injection mechanism. > > And that difference in the MAD injection mechanism is rate based.
IMHO it is not "rate based", but rather timeout driven. > > > So trying to differentiate MADs itself seems confused for me. > > I'm still not following why you say this. > > > > >> > but instead two mad > >> > injection limits (regular and timedout) and timeout value (which BTW > >> > likely should be a function of --timeout parameter). Isn't it? > >> > >> The separate timeout for this provides finer control over pacing the > >> higher SMP limit rather than basing it on the transaction timeout. If > >> it is a function of the transaction timeout as you propose above, is > >> there admin control over it ? If there is, then there is another > >> config param to express this anyhow. > > > > No problem to have this configurable for finer control, but in case > > when requested smps_on_wire_limit_low < smps_on_wire_limit_high we could > > want to have some reasonable default value for the timeout. > > The default in the proposed patch is that this mechanism is disabled. > Are you saying to change this to have it enabled with a default > timeout ? No, meaning that the default case is both limits are equivalent. The timeout is less matter in this case. Sasha > I think it's better to leave the default disabled so the > default is to behave same as today. > > -- Hal > > >> If there isn't, then what hard > >> coded function do you think is appropriate ? > > > > timeout * retries ? > > > > Sasha > > > >> > >> -- Hal > >> > >> > Sasha > >> > > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
