Re: [ewg] To OFED or not to OFED
As a OFED User I would rather it include all the low level drivers. The problem comes with mixed hardware environments. If I have to go to Mellanox for their drivers they will insist I run their complete MLNX OFED build. If I go to Qlogic/Intel they will say the same. I will then end up with two different OFED distros running which makes our life really difficult. At least today I can choose, i'e as these drivers are all in OFED, they are also all in the MLNX_OFED as well so I can choose to run that if I wish. If they are taken out of OFED, I won't have that choice. I like choice. If the other vendors are not maintaining their drivers and there are know bugs with them, then this should be documented in the release notes and as a last recourse they get dropped from a specific OFED release. We need to keep the door open to these other vendors, then the User community can apply pressure to them. I'll mention this to both the Chelsio and Intel sales teams when they next come knocking at my door to buy their stuff. -- Richard Croucher www.informatix-sol.com +44-7802-213901 On Wed, 2012-04-18 at 15:42 +, Woodruff, Robert J wrote: I think it is too soon to discuss this with the board. Right now the EWG is not recommending anything, just soliciting input from the larger community. Let's have the discussion on the list first to get people's position on this before we have any discussions at the board meeting. -Original Message- From: ewg-boun...@lists.openfabrics.org [mailto:ewg-boun...@lists.openfabrics.org] On Behalf Of Gilad Shainer Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2012 8:32 AM To: Ryan, Jim; Tziporet Koren; ewg@lists.openfabrics.org Subject: Re: [ewg] To OFED or not to OFED Jim, I believe that we should also include Tziporet and maybe others, therefore Friday will not work for folks from Israel. Gilad -Original Message- From: ewg-boun...@lists.openfabrics.org [mailto:ewg-boun...@lists.openfabrics.org] On Behalf Of Ryan, Jim Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2012 8:28 AM To: Tziporet Koren; ewg@lists.openfabrics.org Subject: Re: [ewg] To OFED or not to OFED Tziporet, I think this is a very important decision. I'd like to make it an agenda item for the Board meeting on Friday. Woody typically participates -- would this be ok? Thanks, Jim -Original Message- From: ewg-boun...@lists.openfabrics.org [mailto:ewg-boun...@lists.openfabrics.org] On Behalf Of Tziporet Koren Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2012 8:04 AM To: ewg@lists.openfabrics.org Subject: [ewg] To OFED or not to OFED Hi All, We started to work on OFED 3.2 and for now we already have the base code working with the new compat framework: - IB core (all modules) - IPoIB - mlx4, mthca - Mellanox drivers However for the last few months there was no progress on any other low level driver: - qib - Intel - nec - Intel - cxgb3/4 - Chelsio Since there is no reason to have OFED release for Mellanox only we need to understand the other companies position and commitment for OFED. We have two options: - Drop OFED releases all together. Focus our EWG efforts in pushing APIs, testing of the Linux inbox SW stack and driver enhancements for the RDMA technology - Get real commitment from the vendors on dates to provide the backport support (we can move to kernel 3.3 if we decide this) Please do your internal consideration and come back with your decision. The final decision will be taken in next EWG meeting on May 1. Thanks Tziporet Woody ___ ewg mailing list ewg@lists.openfabrics.org http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ewg ___ ewg mailing list ewg@lists.openfabrics.org http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ewg ___ ewg mailing list ewg@lists.openfabrics.org http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ewg ___ ewg mailing list ewg@lists.openfabrics.org http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ewg smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ ewg mailing list ewg@lists.openfabrics.org http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ewg
Re: [ewg] To OFED or not to OFED
We had already talked in our last ewg meeting that we are working on providing backports support (for NES) for OFED-3.2. In our next ewg meeting, timelines will be discussed. It has taken long and as we have been going over the new OFED package and had issues earlier and hopefully we will have the package with all the drivers. Thanks Faisal From: ewg-boun...@lists.openfabrics.org [mailto:ewg-boun...@lists.openfabrics.org] On Behalf Of richard Croucher Sent: Friday, April 20, 2012 2:45 AM To: Woodruff, Robert J Cc: ewg@lists.openfabrics.org Subject: Re: [ewg] To OFED or not to OFED As a OFED User I would rather it include all the low level drivers. The problem comes with mixed hardware environments. If I have to go to Mellanox for their drivers they will insist I run their complete MLNX OFED build. If I go to Qlogic/Intel they will say the same. I will then end up with two different OFED distros running which makes our life really difficult. At least today I can choose, i'e as these drivers are all in OFED, they are also all in the MLNX_OFED as well so I can choose to run that if I wish. If they are taken out of OFED, I won't have that choice. I like choice. If the other vendors are not maintaining their drivers and there are know bugs with them, then this should be documented in the release notes and as a last recourse they get dropped from a specific OFED release. We need to keep the door open to these other vendors, then the User community can apply pressure to them. I'll mention this to both the Chelsio and Intel sales teams when they next come knocking at my door to buy their stuff. -- Richard Croucher www.informatix-sol.comhttp://www.informatix-sol.com +44-7802-213901 On Wed, 2012-04-18 at 15:42 +, Woodruff, Robert J wrote: I think it is too soon to discuss this with the board. Right now the EWG is not recommending anything, just soliciting input from the larger community. Let's have the discussion on the list first to get people's position on this before we have any discussions at the board meeting. -Original Message- From: ewg-boun...@lists.openfabrics.orgmailto:ewg-boun...@lists.openfabrics.org [mailto:ewg-boun...@lists.openfabrics.org] On Behalf Of Gilad Shainer Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2012 8:32 AM To: Ryan, Jim; Tziporet Koren; ewg@lists.openfabrics.orgmailto:ewg@lists.openfabrics.org Subject: Re: [ewg] To OFED or not to OFED Jim, I believe that we should also include Tziporet and maybe others, therefore Friday will not work for folks from Israel. Gilad -Original Message- From: ewg-boun...@lists.openfabrics.orgmailto:ewg-boun...@lists.openfabrics.org [mailto:ewg-boun...@lists.openfabrics.org] On Behalf Of Ryan, Jim Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2012 8:28 AM To: Tziporet Koren; ewg@lists.openfabrics.orgmailto:ewg@lists.openfabrics.org Subject: Re: [ewg] To OFED or not to OFED Tziporet, I think this is a very important decision. I'd like to make it an agenda item for the Board meeting on Friday. Woody typically participates -- would this be ok? Thanks, Jim -Original Message- From: ewg-boun...@lists.openfabrics.orgmailto:ewg-boun...@lists.openfabrics.org [mailto:ewg-boun...@lists.openfabrics.org] On Behalf Of Tziporet Koren Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2012 8:04 AM To: ewg@lists.openfabrics.orgmailto:ewg@lists.openfabrics.org Subject: [ewg] To OFED or not to OFED Hi All, We started to work on OFED 3.2 and for now we already have the base code working with the new compat framework: - IB core (all modules) - IPoIB - mlx4, mthca - Mellanox drivers However for the last few months there was no progress on any other low level driver: - qib - Intel - nec - Intel - cxgb3/4 - Chelsio Since there is no reason to have OFED release for Mellanox only we need to understand the other companies position and commitment for OFED. We have two options: - Drop OFED releases all together. Focus our EWG efforts in pushing APIs, testing of the Linux inbox SW stack and driver enhancements for the RDMA technology - Get real commitment from the vendors on dates to provide the backport support (we can move to kernel 3.3 if we decide this) Please do your internal consideration and come back with your decision. The final decision will be taken in next EWG meeting on May 1. Thanks Tziporet Woody ___ ewg mailing list ewg@lists.openfabrics.orgmailto:ewg@lists.openfabrics.org http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ewg ___ ewg mailing list ewg@lists.openfabrics.orgmailto:ewg@lists.openfabrics.org http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ewg ___ ewg mailing list ewg@lists.openfabrics.orgmailto:ewg@lists.openfabrics.org http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ewg
Re: [ewg] Status of SDP? (and ib_sdp patch for Linux-3.4.x)
IMHO Mellanox would rather sell you their VMA than have you use a free SDP. I assume that they have stopped maintaining SDP. It's a great shame to see it dropped. It a good way for people to get going with InfiniBand, particularly since IPoIB performance is so poor. -- Richard Croucher www.informatix-sol.com +44-7802-213901 On Wed, 2012-04-18 at 15:07 +0200, Benjamin Thery wrote: On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 22:01, Tziporet Koren tzipo...@mellanox.com wrote: So where did it go? Is SDP obsolete? its deprecated Oh. Is there another ULP that replaces it? Offer the same feat.? Also, without knowing above status, I ported ib_sdp.ko in OFED-1.5 to Linux 3.4.0-rc1 just so I can try it out (I'm also trying out ib_srpt, so I needed recent enough kernel). # For anyone interested, I pasted the diff to # http://pastebin.com/download.php?i=HpS54PR2 Is there any place I can submit a patch, if SDP development is still continuing? You can submit the patches to Amir Vadai who still maintain SDP in EWG BTW - do you wish to be the maintainer of SDP? Tziporet ___ ewg mailing list ewg@lists.openfabrics.org http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ewg ___ ewg mailing list ewg@lists.openfabrics.org http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ewg smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ ewg mailing list ewg@lists.openfabrics.org http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ewg
Re: [ewg] Status of SDP? (and ib_sdp patch for Linux-3.4.x)
Ben wrote, Oh. Is there another ULP that replaces it? Offer the same feat.? Sean is working on an alternative socket-like API called rsockets that you might be interested in. It is completely user-space library and does not have any Microsoft IP issues. This may be an acceptable alternative to SDP for some applications. woody ___ ewg mailing list ewg@lists.openfabrics.org http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ewg
