On Thu, 30 Mar 2023 at 14:16, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>
>
>
> On 30.03.2023 13:15, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> > On 30/03/2023 14:06, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 30.03.2023 00:24, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> >>> Konrad brought up the topic of scaling the MX domain according to the
> >>> OPP
On 30.03.2023 13:15, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On 30/03/2023 14:06, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 30.03.2023 00:24, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>>> Konrad brought up the topic of scaling the MX domain according to the
>>> OPP changes. Here is my RFC for this functionality. I post it as an RFC
On 30/03/2023 14:06, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
On 30.03.2023 00:24, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
Konrad brought up the topic of scaling the MX domain according to the
OPP changes. Here is my RFC for this functionality. I post it as an RFC
for two reasons:
1) I'm not sure that we should scale MX if we
On 30.03.2023 00:24, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> Konrad brought up the topic of scaling the MX domain according to the
> OPP changes. Here is my RFC for this functionality. I post it as an RFC
> for two reasons:
>
> 1) I'm not sure that we should scale MX if we are not scaling main
> voltage
Konrad brought up the topic of scaling the MX domain according to the
OPP changes. Here is my RFC for this functionality. I post it as an RFC
for two reasons:
1) I'm not sure that we should scale MX if we are not scaling main
voltage following the CPR3
2) With this patchset I'm getting the
