On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 09:51:04AM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 11:28:06AM -0500, Doug Ledford wrote:
On 12/15/2016 9:52 AM, ira.weiny wrote:
2) With more than 60% of the code being MAD related, and another
significant chunk being hfi related, and only a minor bit (20% maybe?)
being net related,
Hi Doug and Ira,
I may admit that I didn't read the code very deep, but from brief
overview, I didn't find support for the claim the "60% code is MAD related".
It looks like the opposite thing will be more accurate.
Can you help me to understand this claim? How did you come to this
conclusion?
Thanks
Hi Leon,
Here is the breakdown of patches based on functionality.
In this series, patches #3..#8 compose hfi_vnic driver. In that, patches #4, #7
and #8 are MAD focused (interfacing with MAD agent and handling MAD packets).
Patch #6 and half of #3 (_encap.c/h) are OPA encapsulation related. Patch #5 is
netdev statistic related (which includes statistics MAD definitions).
So, only part of patch #3 (_netdev.c and _ethtool.c) deals with interfacing
with netstack.
Those percentage numbers are based on actual lines of code in these patches
(files).
We are also looking into Jason’s suggestion to make hfi_vnic interface to the
bottom driver a generic interface. This will include moving some of the
netstack interfacing to the bottom hfi1 driver.
Niranjana
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
