> On Jun 21, 2018, at 9:06 PM, Leon Romanovsky <leon@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 08:56:23PM +0300, Alexey Lyashkov wrote: >> Majd, >> >> how soon? I have plan to work patch on We are working on it.. Targeting 4.19 >> next week, >> i looks copy-paste of pointed Leon with some minor changes and applied to the different buffer. >> > > Changing CQ was low hanging fruit because CQs are in multiple of > CQEs (64bytes), for QPs you will need to take into account different > sizes while allocating fragmented buffers. > > Thanks > >>> 21 июня 2018 г., в 14:20, Majd Dibbiny <majd@xxxxxxxxxxxx> написал(а): >>> >>> >>>>> On Jun 21, 2018, at 1:14 PM, Leon Romanovsky <leon@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 10:48:16AM +0300, Alexey Lyashkov wrote: >>>>> Hi All, >>>>> >>>>> while a lustre testing I have seen an very high ordered allocations was done by mlx5 driver. >>>>> Similar bug reported agaist mlx4 driver in Lustre ticket https://jira.whamcloud.com/browse/LU-10736. >>>>> As i see both fails related to the SGE array buffer allocation (sorry, i don’t know a good terms for it). >>>>> But it uses a continues space, instead of fragmented. >>>>> I have several questions about it >>>>> What a reason for it? why don’t use a fragmented allocation and merge it logically as before for mlx4? >>>> >>>> I don't know the reasons for it, but we are working to avoid such large >>>> allocations, for example see commit 88ca8be0037 "IB/mlx5: Implement fragmented >>>> completion queue (CQ)" >>> Soon we are going to do it for QPs of mlx5 and mlx4 as well. >>>> >>>> Thanks >> ��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{���fk��ܨ}���Ơz�j:+v�����w����ޙ��&�)ߡ�a����z�ޗ���ݢj��w�f
