On Wed, 26 Aug 2015, eran ben elisha wrote:
> > Do you have this in a git tree somewhere for testing?
>
> Yes,
> please pull from https://github.com/eranbenelisha/linux branch
> rebased-for-4.3/lb_prev
>
> If you with to get the user space as well for testing, please use:
> https://github.com/eran
On 10/7/2015 6:28 PM, Doug Ledford wrote:
However, the machine is still crashing the iDRAC on reboot. I can't be
certain if it's the SRP target or iSER target causing this as they both
were brought up live at the same time and reboot cycles without either
of these work fine. So I have more inve
On 10/06/2015 05:49 PM, Or Gerlitz wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 12:26 AM, Doug Ledford wrote:
>
>> Nothing so simple unfortunately. And it isn't an IB/RoCE cluster, it's
>> IB/IB/OPA/RoCE/IWARP cluster. Regardless though, that's not my problem
>> and what I'm chasing.
>
> To be precise no t
On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 12:26 AM, Doug Ledford wrote:
> Nothing so simple unfortunately. And it isn't an IB/RoCE cluster, it's
> IB/IB/OPA/RoCE/IWARP cluster. Regardless though, that's not my problem
> and what I'm chasing.
To be precise no two transports out of IB/RoCE/iWARP/OPA are
inter-oper
On 10/06/2015 04:54 PM, Or Gerlitz wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 7:05 PM, Doug Ledford wrote:
>> I'll have some sort of answer for that soon. I spent the better part of
>> last week, and what time I worked on the weekend, plus all day yesterday
>> on the internal infrastructure here at Red Hat.
On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 7:05 PM, Doug Ledford wrote:
> I'll have some sort of answer for that soon. I spent the better part of
> last week, and what time I worked on the weekend, plus all day yesterday
> on the internal infrastructure here at Red Hat. We're experiencing some
> growing pains in ou
On 10/06/2015 12:54 PM, Sagi Grimberg wrote:
>> Then I have to see if any of the currently posted fixes for 4.3rc that
>> I haven't grabbed yet
>> resolve the iSER issue I'm seeing, then I'll move on to for-next
>> processing.
>
> Anything I can help with Doug?
I'll tell you in a few hours.
--
Then I have to see if any of the currently posted fixes for 4.3rc that I
haven't grabbed yet
resolve the iSER issue I'm seeing, then I'll move on to for-next processing.
Anything I can help with Doug?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in
the body of a mess
On 10/05/2015 05:59 PM, Or Gerlitz wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 9:24 PM, Doug Ledford wrote:
>> I'm getting ready to tackle the for-next backlog.
>
> Sounds, good, rc4 is here... so lets get things going. I see that
> there is a 4.4 branch @ your kernel.org tree with the checksum bits,
> is t
On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 9:24 PM, Doug Ledford wrote:
> I'm getting ready to tackle the for-next backlog.
Sounds, good, rc4 is here... so lets get things going. I see that
there is a 4.4 branch @ your kernel.org tree with the checksum bits,
is there anything else which you've already picked into y
On 09/21/2015 10:24 AM, eran ben elisha wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 5:34 PM, Eran Ben Elisha wrote:
>> Hi Doug,
>>
>> This patch-set adds a new implementation for multicast loopback prevention
>> for
>> mlx4 driver. The current implementation is very limited, especially if link
>> layer is
On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 5:34 PM, Eran Ben Elisha wrote:
> Hi Doug,
>
> This patch-set adds a new implementation for multicast loopback prevention
> for
> mlx4 driver. The current implementation is very limited, especially if link
> layer is Ethernet. The new implementation is based on HW featur
On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 7:44 PM, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Aug 2015, Eran Ben Elisha wrote:
>
>> This patch-set adds a new implementation for multicast loopback prevention
>> for
>> mlx4 driver. The current implementation is very limited, especially if link
>> layer is Ethernet. The
On Thu, 20 Aug 2015, Eran Ben Elisha wrote:
> This patch-set adds a new implementation for multicast loopback prevention
> for
> mlx4 driver. The current implementation is very limited, especially if link
> layer is Ethernet. The new implementation is based on HW feature of dropping
> incoming
Hi Doug,
This patch-set adds a new implementation for multicast loopback prevention for
mlx4 driver. The current implementation is very limited, especially if link
layer is Ethernet. The new implementation is based on HW feature of dropping
incoming multicast packets if the sender QP counter ind
15 matches
Mail list logo
