Re: [Nbd] NBD using SDP
- To: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...17...>
- Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org, Wouter Verhelst <w@...112...>
- Subject: Re: [Nbd] NBD using SDP
- From: John Leidel <john.leidel@...17...>
- Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 08:44:37 -0500
- Message-id: <1192542277.4558.33.camel@...140...>
- In-reply-to: <170fa0d20710160544n2e18c56cmb0a78c05df356a3d@...18...>
- References: <1192490510.4558.2.camel@...140...> <20071016105002.GA4218@...39...> <170fa0d20710160544n2e18c56cmb0a78c05df356a3d@...18...>
I could also setup a patch tree for the `extended` NBD driver if anyone
has any specific interest.
On Tue, 2007-10-16 at 08:44 -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> On 10/16/07, Wouter Verhelst <w@...112...> wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 15, 2007 at 06:21:50PM -0500, John Leidel wrote:
> > > All... apologies for the random post...
> > It's not random ;-)
> > > sometime ago I created a simple patch set for NBD to directly utilize
> > > the RDMA capabilities of Infiniband via the Sockets Direct Protocol.
> > What are the benefits of doing so? I guess I could be pursuaded to
> > accept this into nbd-tools mainline, but I'd really have to know what
> > these protocols do, and how they benefit NBD.
> NBD would be more performant on an Infiniband network because SDP
> allows more efficient use of the IB stack than if relying on IPoIB.
> The cpu overhead should be reduced and overall throughput increased.
> BTW, if you were to accept this wouldn't you just be patching the nbd
> source directly (as is indicated by John's tarball of patches)?
> Adding SDP support implies altering the socket address family to be
> AF_INET_OFFLOAD rather than AF_INIT. So SDP support could easily be
> made a configure/compile time thing.