On 09:32 Mon 20 Jul , Hal Rosenstock wrote: > > > Wouldn't it be better instead of allocating extra memory for "disabled" > > (0 - lash_vl_start) VLs range and tracking 'max_vl' in many places just > > to setup lash->vl_min at end of discover_network_properties() as vl_min - > > lash_vl_start and to increase routing_table[i].lane value by > > lash_vl_start at end of lash cycle? > > Something like that could be done. Does it save significant memory > (haven't looked yet to see exactly) ?
Not sure about memory saving significance, but guess that this will simplify (actually leave "as is") the flows and will keep lash core unaffected by this addition. > OK as a subsequent patch to this > change ? I don't think - this seems like a different approach for me. Sasha _______________________________________________ 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
