public inbox for devel@edk2.groups.io
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Tomas Pilar (tpilar)" <tpilar@solarflare.com>
To: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>,
	"Fu, Siyuan" <siyuan.fu@intel.com>,
	"Wu,  Jiaxin" <jiaxin.wu@intel.com>,
	"edk2-devel@lists.01.org" <edk2-devel@lists.01.org>
Cc: "Ye, Ting" <ting.ye@intel.com>
Subject: Re: Network Stack Budgeting
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2019 13:52:11 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <a8bebc45-a541-15ca-0600-3110e63a200f@solarflare.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <24080ea2-e564-69dd-73dd-ecbb5435f653@redhat.com>



On 29/01/2019 13:42, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
> On 01/29/19 11:54, Tomas Pilar (tpilar) wrote:
>>> Why TFTP client just pull one packet per second? I think it’s not
>>> correct and it could use the poll() function to accelerate the
>>> receive. Why you trying to solve a TFTP layer problem in SNP layer?
>>> It breaks the design principle of network layer model.
>> Yes, I appreciate the principle. However, in practice we don't get to
>> sell adapters that do not PXE boot and it's pointless to argue with
>> customers that they have a rubbish TFTP client implementation. So we
>> put in workarounds into the driver.
> Actually, I think this is the core principle behind the UEFI forum, and
> the UEFI spec. You shouldn't have to implement bug compat hacks. The era
> when an add-on card would work on some platform's BIOS but not on
> another's should be left behind. You have a spec to point at, and the
> platform in question was likely certified against that spec in some form
> (possibly self-certified).
>
> Sp I think it would be reasonable to contact the platform vendor, and to
> direct your own customers to that ticket too. If you have a
> representative on the USWG, it might make sense to raise the issue there
> as well, especially if the issue is wide-spread and affects multiple
> platform vendors. The UEFI spec targets practical, common use cases, and
> this looks like one.
>
> (When a RH customer or partner reports e.g. a RHEL kernel issue to us,
> and we determine it is a problem in the firmware, we absolutely talk to
> the platform vendor, and sometimes to standards bodies too. We also
> advise customers on the applications that they run on RHEL, if they ask
> and/or care to listen. Plus, some high-profile applications and RHEL are
> explicitly certified against each other.)
>
> ... I don't mean to intrude of course; I'm sorry if I came through like
> that.
Thanks, this is some good food for thought. I certainly appreciate the progress we've made since the old EFI days.

Tom

>
> Thanks
> Laszlo



      reply	other threads:[~2019-01-29 13:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-01-23 10:55 Network Stack Budgeting Tomas Pilar (tpilar)
2019-01-23 14:14 ` Ye, Ting
2019-01-23 14:51   ` Tomas Pilar (tpilar)
2019-01-23 16:08 ` Laszlo Ersek
2019-01-23 16:27   ` Tomas Pilar (tpilar)
2019-01-23 17:47     ` Andrew Fish
2019-01-23 22:18     ` Laszlo Ersek
2019-01-24 11:37       ` Tomas Pilar (tpilar)
2019-01-24 12:25         ` Laszlo Ersek
2019-01-24 12:58           ` Tomas Pilar (tpilar)
2019-01-24 13:25             ` Tomas Pilar (tpilar)
2019-01-24 16:49               ` Laszlo Ersek
2019-01-24 17:43                 ` Tomas Pilar (tpilar)
2019-01-25  8:44                   ` Wu, Jiaxin
2019-01-25 12:08                     ` Tomas Pilar (tpilar)
2019-01-27 14:28                       ` Fu, Siyuan
2019-01-28 11:24                         ` Tomas Pilar (tpilar)
2019-01-29  3:20                           ` Fu, Siyuan
2019-01-29 10:54                             ` Tomas Pilar (tpilar)
2019-01-29 13:06                               ` Fu, Siyuan
2019-01-29 13:12                                 ` Tomas Pilar (tpilar)
2019-01-29 13:42                               ` Laszlo Ersek
2019-01-29 13:52                                 ` Tomas Pilar (tpilar) [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-list from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=a8bebc45-a541-15ca-0600-3110e63a200f@solarflare.com \
    --to=devel@edk2.groups.io \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox