On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 10:45:58AM +0200, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 10, 2019 at 04:33:28PM +0100, Lukas Wunner wrote:
> > at the bottom of this page there's
> > a figure showing a PCI tunnel between non-adjacent switches (blue line):
> >
> >
On Sun, Feb 10, 2019 at 04:33:28PM +0100, Lukas Wunner wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 06, 2019 at 04:17:24PM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> > Now that we can allocate hop IDs per port on a path, we can take
> > advantage of this and create tunnels covering longer paths than just
> > between two adjacent
On Wed, Feb 06, 2019 at 04:17:24PM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> Now that we can allocate hop IDs per port on a path, we can take
> advantage of this and create tunnels covering longer paths than just
> between two adjacent switches. PCIe actually does not need this as it is
> always a daisy
Now that we can allocate hop IDs per port on a path, we can take
advantage of this and create tunnels covering longer paths than just
between two adjacent switches. PCIe actually does not need this as it is
always a daisy chain between two adjacent switches but this way we do
not need to hard-code
4 matches
Mail list logo