Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2015 08:39:00 -0700 From: aurfalien <aurfalien@gmail.com> To: Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org> Cc: "K. Macy" <kmacy@freebsd.org>, freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Mellanox 40Gb support Message-ID: <1D67A5BA-D9A1-4729-A6F2-4A3241C13EF9@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <55D7431C.4010502@freebsd.org> References: <39463A45-148F-431E-9C75-87952B27033A@gmail.com> <CAHM0Q_M%2BnR-rtrX9NVMgHHka36U4cEJVrEayEA_qkoOnhTwUNQ@mail.gmail.com> <F632C05F-698B-43ED-B20B-CCE8D79E5658@gmail.com> <55D741FE.3090009@freebsd.org> <D37A0DFF-0CF2-43BD-B9F9-C9FE0AA70AF6@gmail.com> <55D7431C.4010502@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Ah I see. Well I=92m primitive and use whats in current. I had attempted this before using there standard EN driver and failed = massively. So I=92ll be using there OFED driver. - aurf "Janitorial Services" On Aug 21, 2015, at 8:26 AM, Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org> wrote: > On 8/21/15 11:24 PM, aurfalien wrote: >> Hi, >>=20 >> Well, this is all in a test env of course, but I=92m planning to use = head. >>=20 >> What are your thoughts? > My curiosity was as to whether you hook this into the current NFS or = whether=20 > it's so different that it's almost a new implementation..? >=20 >> =20 >> - aurf >>=20 >> "Janitorial Services" >>=20 >> On Aug 21, 2015, at 8:21 AM, Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org> = wrote: >>=20 >>> On 8/21/15 10:29 PM, aurfalien wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>>=20 >>>> Thanks very much for the response. >>>>=20 >>>> Well, I=92m implementing NFSoRDMA and as a best practices, Mellanox = suggested I use the very latest drivers. >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>> really? >>> On FreeBSD? >>> Is this a fresh implementation of NFS or using the NFS in head? >>>=20 >>=20 >=20
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1D67A5BA-D9A1-4729-A6F2-4A3241C13EF9>