On Tue, 2007-12-11 at 16:56 +0000, Sasha Khapyorsky wrote: > On 16:46 Tue 11 Dec , Sasha Khapyorsky wrote: > > On 07:25 Tue 11 Dec , Hal Rosenstock wrote: > > > On Tue, 2007-12-11 at 15:27 +0000, Sasha Khapyorsky wrote: > > > > On 06:57 Tue 11 Dec , Hal Rosenstock wrote: > > > > > On Tue, 2007-12-11 at 13:46 +0000, Sasha Khapyorsky wrote: > > > > > > For CAs query performance counters only for single ports by lid and > > > > > > port > > > > > > number, and not whole node with 'all ports' option. > > > > > > > > > > Should the description also reference the bug # ? > > > > > > > > I will add. > > > > > > > > > Will a similar thing be done to the other diag scripts which have this > > > > > same issue (but haven't been reported yet) ? > > > > > > > > It is reasonable. I will try to check other scripts too. > > > > > > > > > Would it be better to fix this in the underlying tool used (perfquery) > > > > > and in that way address it for all the diag scripts ? > > > > > > > > I think perfquery could/should be improved as well, but it is not the > > > > same issue. > > > > > > Why not ? > > > > > > If perfquery paved over the lack of support for all ports, then all the > > > scripts would be fine as is, right ? > > Another aspect of this. > > I'm not close that 'all ports' simulation in perfquery is great thing.
In a sense, it's no different than what the agent itself might be doing; albeit over a larger time span. > perfquery is low level tool and it should be able to indicate in clear > way that 'all ports' option is not supported by port instead of hiding > this behind simulation. Maybe 'all ports' simulation should optional... Guess you did a 180 turn on this. Last I recall on the list you wanted this functionality. > I'm not sure yet. > > Also I think that when perfquery targets CA port just by LID and when > port number is not specified 'all ports' should not be default, but > instead port number of this LID. Such behavior seems to be more "native" > for me. Not sure what you mean by "native" but there is some precedence in the IB spec for your preference depending on one's interpretation of the PortSelect component description. -- Hal > Sasha > _______________________________________________ > general mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general > > To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general _______________________________________________ ewg mailing list ewg@lists.openfabrics.org http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ewg