Re: [PATCH 01/10] IB/ehca: Support for multiple event queues

[Roland Dreier]

 > No, I've no figures to provide here. The background of this dist_eqs
 > option is actually to allow us testing across all event queues
 > without to change the testcases resp consumers to use certain
 > event queue number. Thus, I should comment it as EXPERIMENTAL?

Seems like it's just development/testing code that shouldn't escape
into the wild?

 > > I think I would rather hold off on multiple EQs for this merge window
 > > and plan on having something really solid and thought-out for 2.6.24.

 > Fair enough. However why don't let us gather experience with this
 > feature now? Should we remove dist_eqs option for more consistency?

As I said I definitely think the dist_eqs switch doesn't sound like
something we want to expose to people.

With that said I still am not sure about putting the multiple EQs
feature in this release.  All the infrastructure is there to make
experimenting with it fairly painless (just the low-level driver needs
to change), and I still haven't seen much code using the feature or
even any anecdotal information about the performance impact.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/