[Fwd: Re: [ewg] OFED October 29 meeting summary on OFED 1.3 beta readiness]

2007-10-31 Thread Betsy Zeller
I sent this out last night, but noticed it didn't appear in my inbox, so
trying different address. Tziporet, can you let me know you got this?
Thanks, Betsy

 Forwarded Message 
From: Betsy Zeller [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], Tziporet Koren
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [ewg] OFED October 29 meeting summary on OFED 1.3 beta
readiness
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2007 15:59:35 -0700

Tziporet, Vlad - I know the request went out on Monday to have all
kernel backport patches etc updated to work with 2.6.24 by Wednesday.
Unfortunately, due to other schedule commitments, we're not going to be
able to turn those around in two days. My best estimate at the moment is
that we will be able to submit the updated InfiniPath related backport
patches by Friday.

Regards, Betsy

-- 
Betsy Zeller
Director of Software Engineering
HSG InfiniBand Engineering
QLogic Corporation
2071 Stierlin Court, Suite 200
Mountain View, CA, 94043
1-650-934-8088

___
ewg mailing list
ewg@lists.openfabrics.org
http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ewg


Re: [ewg] OFED October 29 meeting summary on OFED 1.3 beta readiness

2007-10-30 Thread Hal Rosenstock
Hi Tziporet,

On 10/30/07, Tziporet Koren [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 OFED October 29 meeting summary on OFED 1.3 beta readiness:

 1. Beta release schedule:

* The release is planed for next Monday Nov-5
* For this the rebase for 2.6.24-rc1 must be completed tomorrow
* I will send status update on Thursday


 2. Beta tasks status:

  1. Fix compilation problems on PPC with 32 bits - Vlad  Oren
  (Mellanox) - on work
  2. Rebase kernel code on 2.6.24 rc1 (depending it's availability)
  - on work (please read mail from Vlad with instructions)
  3. SPEC files should be part of each user space package - each
  owner should take the spec file
  4. Multiple uDAPL libs (1.0  2.0) - Vlad and Arlin (Intel)
  5. Fix all compilation and install issues - All

What about release notes ?

-- Hal



  Done tasks:
  o Add qperf test from Qlogic - Johann (Qlogic)
  o Support RHEL 5 up1 - Woody  Vlad
  o Apply patches that fix warning of backport patches - Vlad
(Mellanox) (one patch was not applied since we got no answer
regarding it)
  o New MVAPICH package - Pasha  DK (OSU)
  o Complete RDS work - Vlad (Mellanox)
  o Integrate all SDP features - Jim (Mellanox)
  o nes - updated backport patches - Glenn (NetEffect)


 3. Bugs that should be with high priority for the beta are all
 compilation and install issues.
I will publish the specific list of bugs
Note: the bug severity in bugzilla are aimed to the GA release


 ___
 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


Re: [ewg] OFED October 29 meeting summary on OFED 1.3 beta readiness

2007-10-30 Thread Tziporet Koren

Hal Rosenstock wrote:

Hi Tziporet,

On 10/30/07, Tziporet Koren [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  

OFED October 29 meeting summary on OFED 1.3 beta readiness:

1. Beta release schedule:

   * The release is planed for next Monday Nov-5
   * For this the rebase for 2.6.24-rc1 must be completed tomorrow
   * I will send status update on Thursday


2. Beta tasks status:

 1. Fix compilation problems on PPC with 32 bits - Vlad  Oren
 (Mellanox) - on work
 2. Rebase kernel code on 2.6.24 rc1 (depending it's availability)
 - on work (please read mail from Vlad with instructions)
 3. SPEC files should be part of each user space package - each
 owner should take the spec file
 4. Multiple uDAPL libs (1.0  2.0) - Vlad and Arlin (Intel)
 5. Fix all compilation and install issues - All



What about release notes ?

-- Hal

  

RN are not a must for the beta release (I updated the general notes)
Anyone that have RN to update can send them to me against branch ofed_1_3

Tziporet
___
ewg mailing list
ewg@lists.openfabrics.org
http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ewg


Re: [ewg] OFED October 29 meeting summary on OFED 1.3 beta readiness

2007-10-30 Thread Betsy Zeller
Tziporet, Vlad - I know the request went out on Monday to have all
kernel backport patches etc updated to work with 2.6.24 by Wednesday.
Unfortunately, due to other schedule commitments, we're not going to be
able to turn those around in two days. My best estimate at the moment is
that we will be able to submit the updated InfiniPath related backport
patches by Friday.

Regards, Betsy

-- 
Betsy Zeller
Director of Software Engineering
HSG InfiniBand Engineering
QLogic Corporation
2071 Stierlin Court, Suite 200
Mountain View, CA, 94043
1-650-934-8088

___
ewg mailing list
ewg@lists.openfabrics.org
http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ewg


Re: [ewg] OFED October 29 meeting summary on OFED 1.3 beta readiness

2007-10-30 Thread Jeremy Brown
On Tue, 2007-10-30 at 16:40 +0200, Tziporet Koren wrote:
   o Apply patches that fix warning of backport patches - Vlad
 (Mellanox) (one patch was not applied since we got no answer
 regarding it)

Yikes, I did drop that on the floor, didn't I? I'm sorry about that.
Here's a reply:

On Thu, 2007-10-25 at 10:05 +0200, Jack Morgenstein wrote: 
 Jeremy,
 
 Why did you remove the likely and unlikely macros?
 
 Isn't the compiler warning just on the missing != NULL ?
 
 - Jack

It looks like we had something of an internal collision between two
patches. The one we submitted fixes a problem at the likely() unlikely()
macros confuse gcc into thinking that tail could be used before it is
assigned. (The engineer doesn't think gcc is producing better code due
to the use of likely/unlikely here.)

Another change that could be used to fix the issue would be along these
lines:

- struct sk_buff *tail;
[...]
- if (likely(skb_len  (tail = skb_peek_tail(sk-sk_receive_queue))) 
- unlikely(skb_tailroom(tail) = skb_len)) {
- skb_copy_bits(skb, 0, skb_put(tail, skb_len), skb_len);
- __kfree_skb(skb);
- skb = tail;
+ if (likely(skb_len)) {
+ struct sk_buff *tail = skb_peek_tail(sk-sk_receive_queue);
+ if (likely(tail)  unlikely(skb_tailroom(tail) = skb_len)) {
+ skb_copy_bits(skb, 0, skb_put(tail, skb_len), skb_len);
+ __kfree_skb(skb);
+ skb = tail;
+ }

Which do you think looks better?

Sorry for the delay!

Jeremy

___
ewg mailing list
ewg@lists.openfabrics.org
http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ewg