similar to: Solarflare SFC9000 direct connection

lejeczek via CentOS wrote: > hi guys > > I wonder if any of you might be using SFN6122F-R7 SFP+ (SFC9000, same > firmware everywhere, Centos 7.5 too. > > I'm trying poor man's setup to get the servers onto 10GbE network. > > > Setup is such that three Dell R815 are connected to each other, each has > one Solarflare(SFP ports) and each Solarflare is set as

Does Anyone with a RedHat subscription able to give a hint as to what the solution to the following knowledgebase article is: https://access.redhat.com/solutions/2801051 I'm having a similar issue with an SFP on a Centos host, and am searching for a way to view Optical RX/TX Power on the SFP. From the switch side, I'm not seeing any RX Power from the Centos host. Thanks in advance

Hi All, I''m trying to choose between 10Gb Ethernet cards for Xen. The trouble is I''m getting quite confused with all the different terms different companies use to describe NIC''s virtualization support. Any ideas what the differences are between these brands? I am trying to sort a comparison table but will need some help: Feature Intel ET Series Mellanox

This patch against linux-2.6.18-xen.hg changest 974:aa133dee7792 Update sfc_netback driver to match sfc_resource 3.0.2.2074 Add support for direct guest access and acceleration of SFC9000 series NICs. Improve handling of NIC reset in sfc_netback Remove nic_index state and replace with if_index from struct net_device Remove duplication of header files with sfc_resource driver Signed-off-by:

Hi, Any folks on this list who have installed CentOS 6.3 on the new Dell Poweredge R815 servers? How was your experience? Thanks -Surya -- Surya Saha Department of Plant Pathology and Plant-Microbe Biology Cornell University, NY, USA http://www.linkedin.com/in/suryasaha

On Thu, 2014-01-16 at 01:38 -0800, Michael Dalton wrote: [...] > --- a/include/linux/netdevice.h > +++ b/include/linux/netdevice.h [...] > @@ -2401,6 +2416,23 @@ static inline int netif_copy_real_num_queues(struct net_device *to_dev, > #endif > } > > +#ifdef CONFIG_SYSFS > +static inline unsigned int get_netdev_rx_queue_index( > + struct netdev_rx_queue *queue) >

On Thu, 2014-01-16 at 01:38 -0800, Michael Dalton wrote: [...] > --- a/include/linux/netdevice.h > +++ b/include/linux/netdevice.h [...] > @@ -2401,6 +2416,23 @@ static inline int netif_copy_real_num_queues(struct net_device *to_dev, > #endif > } > > +#ifdef CONFIG_SYSFS > +static inline unsigned int get_netdev_rx_queue_index( > + struct netdev_rx_queue *queue) >

On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 01:14:20PM -0500, David Miller wrote: > From: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings at solarflare.com> > Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 16:20:46 +0000 > > > If the consensus is still that we must preserve packets exactly (aside > > from the usual modifications by IP routers) then LRO should be disabled > > on all devices for which forwarding is enabled. >

On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 01:14:20PM -0500, David Miller wrote: > From: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings at solarflare.com> > Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 16:20:46 +0000 > > > If the consensus is still that we must preserve packets exactly (aside > > from the usual modifications by IP routers) then LRO should be disabled > > on all devices for which forwarding is enabled. >

On Thu, 2014-01-16 at 11:07 -0800, Michael Dalton wrote: > On Jan 16, 2014 at 10:57 AM, Ben Hutchings <bhutchings at solarflare.com> wrote: > > Why write a loop when you can do: > > i = queue - dev->_rx; > Good point, the loop approach was done in get_netdev_queue_index -- > I agree your fix is faster and simpler. I'll fix in next patchset. It's

On Thu, 2014-01-16 at 11:07 -0800, Michael Dalton wrote: > On Jan 16, 2014 at 10:57 AM, Ben Hutchings <bhutchings at solarflare.com> wrote: > > Why write a loop when you can do: > > i = queue - dev->_rx; > Good point, the loop approach was done in get_netdev_queue_index -- > I agree your fix is faster and simpler. I'll fix in next patchset. It's

On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 03:56:36PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > On Mon, 2013-06-10 at 10:07 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 01:14:20PM -0500, David Miller wrote: > > > From: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings at solarflare.com> > > > Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 16:20:46 +0000 > > > > > > > If the consensus is still that we must

On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 03:56:36PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > On Mon, 2013-06-10 at 10:07 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 01:14:20PM -0500, David Miller wrote: > > > From: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings at solarflare.com> > > > Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 16:20:46 +0000 > > > > > > > If the consensus is still that we must

Hi Jens, James and Martin, This series concludes the work I did for linux-5.5 on the compat_ioctl() cleanup, killing off fs/compat_ioctl.c and block/compat_ioctl.c by moving everything into drivers. Overall this would be a reduction both in complexity and line count, but as I'm also adding documentation the overall number of lines increases in the end. My plan was originally to keep the

Hello all, I was reading up on SMB Direct support and it seems very interesting. I looked through slides of a presentation by Stefan Metzmacher about SMB Direct last year: https://www.samba.org/~metze/presentations/2018/SDC/StefanMetzmacher_SDC2018-SMB-Direct-Status-rev1-presentation.pdf I was wondering what the current support of of SMB Direct for Samba. I have a Windows 10 Pro for Workstations

On Mon, 2014-01-13 at 11:40 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Sun, Jan 12, 2014 at 03:32:28PM -0800, Michael Dalton wrote: [...] > > The last issue is how the rx_queue_attribute 'show' function > > implementation for mergeable_rx_buffer_size will access the appropriate > > per-receive queue EWMA data. The arguments to the show function will be > > the

On Mon, 2014-01-13 at 11:40 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Sun, Jan 12, 2014 at 03:32:28PM -0800, Michael Dalton wrote: [...] > > The last issue is how the rx_queue_attribute 'show' function > > implementation for mergeable_rx_buffer_size will access the appropriate > > per-receive queue EWMA data. The arguments to the show function will be > > the

On Mon, 2013-06-17 at 11:05 +0930, Rusty Russell wrote: > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst at redhat.com> writes: > > On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 03:56:36PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > >> On Mon, 2013-06-10 at 10:07 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > >> > On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 01:14:20PM -0500, David Miller wrote: > >> > > From: Ben Hutchings

On Mon, 2013-06-17 at 11:05 +0930, Rusty Russell wrote: > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst at redhat.com> writes: > > On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 03:56:36PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > >> On Mon, 2013-06-10 at 10:07 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > >> > On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 01:14:20PM -0500, David Miller wrote: > >> > > From: Ben Hutchings

On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 11:02:18AM +0000, douxevip via samba wrote: > Hi all, is there anybody on the mailing list who is more knowledgeable about SMB direct? Would appreciate some pointers. See below. Thanks. > > -------- Original Message -------- > On Jul 25, 2019, 22:52, douxevip via samba < samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > Hello all, I was reading up on SMB Direct