Hi Jonathan, Thanks for taking this on. On 2018-12-10 4:56 a.m., Jonathan Cameron wrote: > I would recommend reading the ECR and presentation for more details. > Anyone who can't get to Google Drive, email me and I'll send a copy directly. > > ECR: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1X08pfyjkNwSfpTVBuiut90ajxBZd7BXg > Slides: https://drive.google.com/open?id=11d3egA8x91d99-QqfYGZ-MxLGrHpJHCK I've looked through the ECR now a couple times and haven't really spotted any major issues with it. The minimum supported bandwidth requirement is pretty vague and my biggest concern is that hardware vendors must report consistently otherwise this is useless. So I'd maybe suggest expanding on what's required before hardware is allowed to indicate support. Also, one thought is, it might be better to add another bit indicating performance. So the hardware can say: these TLPs will be supported but they will not be supported at high bandwidth. In terms of defining high bandwidth: what I care about is whether the bandwidth through the P2P link will be significantly slower than the bandwidth of going to/from system RAM. If that's the case it probably means a subset of P2P applications would rather just transfer to RAM instead of going P2P. Logan
