All,
Has anyone in the forum had the chance to attend the WinHEC
recently? I believe there was a talk there on the performance benefits of
the StorPort driver. Would anyone know what kind of performance benefits can
be expected by having the finer grained locking of StorPort? I guess my
primary concern is CPU utilization here.
I am interested in an SMP scenario, with say just one HBA. As of the
old Port driver, the StartIO and ISR of the miniport are synced. Now with a
StorPort on an SMP, it would be possible to have one processor do StartIO
while the other serves the ISR?
Regards,
Sirish
>
I am interested in an SMP scenario, with say just one
HBA. As of the old Port driver, the StartIO and ISR of the
miniport are synced. Now with a StorPort on an SMP, it would
be possible to have one processor do StartIO while the other
serves the ISR?
Yes. So you should be able to queue requests while your isr is manipulating
the hardware. Storport is not meant to be a replacement for ‘standard’ scsi
miniports, it is targeted at high end (e.g. fibre channel,) miniports, and
at all of those folks who have in the past been forced to write their own
port driver due to the architectural limitations of scsiport.
But I guess even an ordinary SCSI miniport would benefit atleast in terms of
CPU utilization. The hardware may run to capacity at a lower cost…
-----Original Message-----
From: Roddy, Mark [mailto:xxxxx@stratus.com]
Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 11:21 AM
To: NT Developers Interest List
Subject: [ntdev] RE: Benefits of StorPort
I am interested in an SMP scenario, with say just one
HBA. As of the old Port driver, the StartIO and ISR of the
miniport are synced. Now with a StorPort on an SMP, it would
be possible to have one processor do StartIO while the other
serves the ISR?
Yes. So you should be able to queue requests while your isr is manipulating
the hardware. Storport is not meant to be a replacement for ‘standard’ scsi
miniports, it is targeted at high end (e.g. fibre channel,) miniports, and
at all of those folks who have in the past been forced to write their own
port driver due to the architectural limitations of scsiport.
You are currently subscribed to ntdev as: xxxxx@vmware.com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to %%email.unsub%%
> the hardware. Storport is not meant to be a replacement for
‘standard’ scsi
miniports, it is targeted at high end (e.g. fibre channel,)
miniports, and
at all of those folks who have in the past been forced to write
their own
port driver due to the architectural limitations of scsiport.
StorPort still has lots of limitations, it still does not allow
completely deserialized miniports (at least according to StorPort
specs I saw some time ago).
Max
When I looked at the StorPort spec, I decided that STorPort did not make it
any easier to do network attached storage. I don’t understand why they did
not allow you to leave the StorPort Context and then get back into it as
NDIS has done for it’s deserialized interface.
–Mark
–
Mark Cariddi
Open Systems Resources, Inc.
www.osr.com
“Roddy, Mark” wrote in message news:xxxxx@ntdev…
>
>
> >
> > I am interested in an SMP scenario, with say just one
> > HBA. As of the old Port driver, the StartIO and ISR of the
> > miniport are synced. Now with a StorPort on an SMP, it would
> > be possible to have one processor do StartIO while the other
> > serves the ISR?
> >
> Yes. So you should be able to queue requests while your isr is
manipulating
> the hardware. Storport is not meant to be a replacement for ‘standard’
scsi
> miniports, it is targeted at high end (e.g. fibre channel,) miniports, and
> at all of those folks who have in the past been forced to write their own
> port driver due to the architectural limitations of scsiport.
>
>