Michael> Maybe we should just assign EQs to CQs in a round-robin
Michael> fashion for now, and just hope typical use allocates CQs
Michael> sequentially. Worst case, we are back to where we are
Michael> now, performance-wise. Roland, how does this sound?
I think what we should do is follow the IB verbs extensions and expose
multiple CQ event vectors, and let the consumer pick which one to use
when creating a CQ. If IPoIB wants to go round robin itself, that
would be fine.
This is what I tried to set the userspace API up for. Nothing in
userspace would have to change for this -- the kernel just needs to
add multiple EQ support.
- R.
_______________________________________________
openib-general mailing list
openib-general@openib.org
http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
