rick wrote:
> For what it's worth: As a customer who is using the SS stack - we were
> more than pleased that we could achieve IPOIB (and RDS) failover without
> using the bonding driver. I believe this is direct result of the Virtual
> NIC approach SS is using.
Were you pleased as of having a
> From: Yaron Haviv [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2006 3:05 PM
> To: Rimmer, Todd; Scott Weitzenkamp (sweitzen); Kuchimanchi,
Ramachandra;
> Roland Dreier (rdreier)
> Cc: openib-General
> Subject: RE: [openib-general] [PATCH 0/10] [RFC] Support for
Sil
Yaron,
On 10/3/06, Yaron Haviv <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The only point I'm making is that any one can add an overlay driver for
> his proprietary HW as he likes, and put it in OFED distribution, but if
> this is becoming an internal portion of the open fabric kernel than:
> 1. Let's look at
> -Original Message-
> From: rick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2006 4:54 PM
> To: Michael Krause
> Cc: Fabian Tillier; Yaron Haviv; Roland Dreier (rdreier); Kuchimanchi,
> Ramachandra; openib-General
> Subject: Re: [openib-general] [PATCH 0/
For what it's worth: As a customer who is using the SS stack - we were
more than pleased that we could achieve IPOIB (and RDS) failover without
using the bonding driver. I believe this is direct result of the Virtual
NIC approach SS is using.
Michael Krause wrote:
>Silverstorm is executing a u
Silverstorm is executing a usage model that the IBTA used to develop the IB
protocols. What is the problem with that? If it works and integrates
into the stack, then this seems like an appropriate bit of functionality to
support. The fact that one can use a standard ULP to communicate to a
Hi Yaron,
On 10/3/06, Yaron Haviv <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I'm trying to figure out why this protocol makes sense
> As far as I understand, IPoIB can provide a Virtual NIC functionality
> just as well (maybe even better), with two restrictions:
> 1. Lack of support for Jumbo Frames
> 2. Does
gt; Subject: Re: [openib-general] [PATCH 0/10] [RFC] Support for
SilverStorm
> Virtual Ethernet I/O controller (VEx)
>
> > From: Scott Weitzenkamp (sweitzen)
> > Sent: Monday, October 02, 2006 4:22 PM
> > To: Kuchimanchi, Ramachandra; Roland Dreier (rdreier)
> > Cc: ope
Roland, Bryan
Thanks for all the review comments. I will start working on the
changes you suggested.
Regards,
Ram
Roland Dreier wrote:
> Ramachandra> In that case, can you please consider this for the
> Ramachandra> for-2.6.20 branch ?
>
> I'm happy to keep this in a vex branch or somet
Ramachandra> In that case, can you please consider this for the
Ramachandra> for-2.6.20 branch ?
> I'm happy to keep this in a vex branch or something like that, but as
> the emails I just sent show, this is not ready for merging yet (which
> is to be expected -- it's never been reviewed).
> From: Scott Weitzenkamp (sweitzen)
> Sent: Monday, October 02, 2006 4:22 PM
> To: Kuchimanchi, Ramachandra; Roland Dreier (rdreier)
> Cc: openib-General
> Subject: Re: [openib-general] [PATCH 0/10] [RFC] Support for
SilverStorm
> Virtual Ethernet I/O controller (VEx)
>
&g
Ramachandra> In that case, can you please consider this for the
Ramachandra> for-2.6.20 branch ?
I'm happy to keep this in a vex branch or something like that, but as
the emails I just sent show, this is not ready for merging yet (which
is to be expected -- it's never been reviewed).
I th
Roland Dreier wrote:
>Ramachandra> This patch series is intended for your infiniband.git
>Ramachandra> for-2.6.19 branch. It also has been tested against
>Ramachandra> the for-2.6.20 branch.
>
>Well, no way is this going to be merged into 2.6.19 at this stage in
>the release cycle (the
Behalf Of Ramachandra K
> Sent: Monday, October 02, 2006 12:58 PM
> To: Roland Dreier (rdreier)
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; openib-General
> Subject: [openib-general] [PATCH 0/10] [RFC] Support for
> SilverStorm Virtual Ethernet I/O controller (VEx)
>
> Hi Roland,
>
> Th
Ramachandra> This patch series is intended for your infiniband.git
Ramachandra> for-2.6.19 branch. It also has been tested against
Ramachandra> the for-2.6.20 branch.
Well, no way is this going to be merged into 2.6.19 at this stage in
the release cycle (the merge window is closing in
Hi Roland,
This patch series adds support for the SilverStorm Virtual Ethernet I/O
Controllers (VEx) by adding a new kernel level driver.
This kernel driver:
1. Communicates with the VEx on the SilverStorm fabric switches/directors using
SilverStorm's native protocol
2. Presents a standard Et
16 matches
Mail list logo
