On 7/16/2012 11:57 PM, Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo wrote:
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 11:43:33PM +0300, Or Gerlitz wrote:
TCP_STREAM from this setup before the patch would be good to know as well
Does the stream test that I did with uperf using messages of 64000 bytes fit?
netperf
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 10:42 PM, Rick Jones wrote:
> I was thinking more along the lines of an additional comparison,
> explicitly using netperf TCP_RR or something like it, not just the packets
> per second from a bulk transfer test.
TCP_STREAM from this setup before the patch would be good t
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 10:42 PM, Rick Jones wrote:
> I was thinking more along the lines of an additional comparison,
> explicitly using netperf TCP_RR or something like it, not just the packets
> per second from a bulk transfer test.
>
TCP_STREAM would be good to know here as well
Or.
___
Roland Dreier wrote:
> I think the right fix for iSER would be to make iSER work even for
> devices that don't support FMRs. For example cxgb3 doesn't implement
> FMRs so if anyone ever updates iSER to work on iWARP and not just IB,
> then this is something that has to be tackled anyway. Then ehc
Joachim Fenkes wrote:
> Roland Dreier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 10.12.2007 22:47:37:
>> It's an optional device feature, so this should be OK
>> (although the iSER driver currently seems to depend on a device
>> supporting FMRs, which is probably going to be a problem with iWARP
>> support in t
