[ewg] Re: [ofa-general] Bonding and hw_csum
On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 19:35 -0800, Shirley Ma wrote: Hello Tziporet, the hw checksum patch was removed from OFED 1.3 Tziporet Could youp please specify which patch has been removed? I still can see a list of patches under RC3. here they are: ipoib_0010_Add-high-dma-support-to-ipoib.patch ipoib_0020_Add-s-g-support-for-IPOIB.patch ipoib_0030_hw_csum.patch ipoib_0040_checksum-offload.patch ipoib_0050_Add-LSO-support.patch ipoib_0060_ethtool-support.patch ipoib_0070_modiy_cq_params.patch ipoib_0080_broadcast_null.patch ipoib_0110_set_default_cq_patams.patch ipoib_0030_hw_csum.patch has been removed ___ ewg mailing list ewg@lists.openfabrics.org http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ewg
[ewg] Re: [ofa-general] Bonding and hw_csum
On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 18:42 +0200, Tziporet Koren wrote: Or Gerlitz wrote: This is interesting report, however, since currently the hw checksum patch in not being submitted to the mainline kernel and it is also about to be removed from ofed 1.3 (Tziporet, can you update on that?), I am not going to look into that. Or. the hw checksum patch was removed from OFED 1.3 I just saw some patches on the mailing list concerning csum offloading. Are these applied in RC3? Or are they going to be introduced in the daily build of tomorrow? Is it correct to state that these patches replace the hw_csum parameter by offloading the csum computation to the mthca? This would mean that the results should be similar also. Does the new offload patch depend on the type of hca being used? According to lspci, we have the InfiniBand: Mellanox Technologies MT25208 InfiniHost III Ex (rev a0) card. Do these patches work on a sles 10 sp1 installed on x3755 and x3655 machines of IBM that have this card inserted? Is bonding going to work with this type of offloading? Kind Regards Koen Tziporet ___ 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 *** Disclaimer *** Vlaamse Radio- en Televisieomroep Auguste Reyerslaan 52, 1043 Brussel nv van publiek recht BTW BE 0244.142.664 RPR Brussel http://www.vrt.be/disclaimer ___ ewg mailing list ewg@lists.openfabrics.org http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ewg
Re: [ewg] Re: [ofa-general] Bonding and hw_csum
Hello Eli, ipoib_0030_hw_csum.patch has been removed Would removing this patch cause any errors on applying the rest of patches? If not, I will remove it for our testing as well. Thanks Shirley ___ ewg mailing list ewg@lists.openfabrics.org http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ewg
[ewg] Re: [ofa-general] Bonding and hw_csum
On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 15:34 +0200, Or Gerlitz wrote: Stijn De Smet wrote: I'm trying to get IPOIB bonding to work with the hw_csum enabled. ... When I disable hw_csums, I can start iperf's, pull and replug all cables and the iperf's run uninterrupted. This is interesting report, however, since currently the hw checksum patch in not being submitted to the mainline kernel and it is also about to be removed from ofed 1.3 (Tziporet, can you update on that?), I am not going to look into that. Do you mean that bonding with hw_csum enabled will never work? Why is hw_checksum not submitted to the mainline kernel (and thus also removed from ofed)? We definitely want to enable hw_checksum as it gives an enormous bandwidth boost with ipoib. Koen. Or. ___ 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 *** Disclaimer *** Vlaamse Radio- en Televisieomroep Auguste Reyerslaan 52, 1043 Brussel nv van publiek recht BTW BE 0244.142.664 RPR Brussel http://www.vrt.be/disclaimer ___ ewg mailing list ewg@lists.openfabrics.org http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ewg
[ewg] Re: [ofa-general] Bonding and hw_csum
Koen Segers wrote: Do you mean that bonding with hw_csum enabled will never work? no, I meant to say that I am not enough into the details and mechanics of the hw_csum approach/patch and since I understand it is going to be removed, I will not look now on going into this report. Why is hw_checksum not submitted to the mainline kernel (and thus also removed from ofed)? We definitely want to enable hw_checksum as it gives an enormous bandwidth boost with ipoib. you should ask that the individual/s that are signed on the patch Or ___ ewg mailing list ewg@lists.openfabrics.org http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ewg
[ewg] Re: [ofa-general] Bonding and hw_csum
On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 16:26 +0200, Or Gerlitz wrote: Why is hw_checksum not submitted to the mainline kernel (and thus also removed from ofed)? We definitely want to enable hw_checksum as it gives an enormous bandwidth boost with ipoib. you should ask that the individual/s that are signed on the patch Is this Michael S. Tsirkin? I don't know where else to find this information. Regards, Koen *** Disclaimer *** Vlaamse Radio- en Televisieomroep Auguste Reyerslaan 52, 1043 Brussel nv van publiek recht BTW BE 0244.142.664 RPR Brussel http://www.vrt.be/disclaimer ___ ewg mailing list ewg@lists.openfabrics.org http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ewg
Re: [ewg] Re: [ofa-general] Bonding and hw_csum
On 1/30/08, Koen Segers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 16:26 +0200, Or Gerlitz wrote: you should ask that the individual/s that are signed on the patch Is this Michael S. Tsirkin? I don't know where else to find this information. In the Linux model, each change is a patch and each patch is signed, so you should locate the patch and see who is signed on it. This can be done each through using git log or browsing through git web on the relevant tree. In this specific case, you can get a snapshot of ofed 1.3 before the patch was removed, get the tgz of ofa-kernel SRPM and untar it, the look on the directory kernel_patches/fixes it should be there as a patch to patch. Or. ___ ewg mailing list ewg@lists.openfabrics.org http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ewg
[ewg] Re: [ofa-general] Bonding and hw_csum
Hello Tziporet, the hw checksum patch was removed from OFED 1.3 Tziporet Could youp please specify which patch has been removed? I still can see a list of patches under RC3. here they are: ipoib_0010_Add-high-dma-support-to-ipoib.patch ipoib_0020_Add-s-g-support-for-IPOIB.patch ipoib_0030_hw_csum.patch ipoib_0040_checksum-offload.patch ipoib_0050_Add-LSO-support.patch ipoib_0060_ethtool-support.patch ipoib_0070_modiy_cq_params.patch ipoib_0080_broadcast_null.patch ipoib_0110_set_default_cq_patams.patch thanks Shirley___ ewg mailing list ewg@lists.openfabrics.org http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ewg
