> Hi Eitan, Hal, > > On 20:44 Wed 25 Jul , Eitan Zahavi wrote: > > > > I am not following you. > > Why do a user need to run -y if a simple legal cable connector is > > plugged? > > Because duplicated GUIDs detector can aborts OpenSM when > regular port is reconnected to another location during hard > sweep. This issue is not related to loopback plug at all. I think we should handle the case of "migrated port" in a more global sense: If a port "moved" during the sweep we have to do a new sweep anyway. Maybe we could delay the 'abort' to the second sweep.
So practically I propose: 1. Add state flag "was duplicated" on the port saying it was reported as duplicate GUID. 2. Set the variable controlling a forced secodn sweep (similar to the one used if we got Set error) 3. Repeat the sweep - if we find a port where it is a duplicate and the "was duplicated" flag is set - abort. A refinement for the user who is doing many changes continuously might be to keep a counter. And have the abort happen after the Nth iteration. > > > The issue is only if a "loop back" plug connecting a port > to itself is > > plugged. > > No, not only. Now there are two completely separate known > issues with duplicated GUIDs detector: > > 1. Port moving > 2. Loopback plug > > And I think that _both_ should be solved. And if just using > '-y' could be suitable for (2) because it is esoteric > (although perfectly legal) use, it is not acceptable solution for (1). > > I think we need to improve GUIDs duplication detector > instead. For example we could add NodeInfo comparison there, > and only in case if it is different drop GUIDs duplication > error. Also I think this should not be fatal error and should > not abort OpenSM, just logging (probably via syslog too) > should be sufficient - non-working port is good reason to > look at logs. Another ideas? The problem is that the SM will sort of figure out the network but will create a completely bogus routing etc. > > Sasha > > > Do users use these plugs? For what sake? > > > > > > Eitan Zahavi > > Senior Engineering Director, Software Architect Mellanox > Technologies > > LTD > > Tel:+972-4-9097208 > > Fax:+972-4-9593245 > > P.O. Box 586 Yokneam 20692 ISRAEL > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Sasha Khapyorsky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2007 3:19 AM > > > To: Eitan Zahavi > > > Cc: Hal Rosenstock; OpenFabrics General; Yevgeny Kliteynik > > > Subject: Re: OpenSM detection of duplicated GUIDs on loopback > > > > > > On 23:25 Tue 24 Jul , Eitan Zahavi wrote: > > > > > > > > On 7/24/07, Eitan Zahavi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Maybe avoid the log if -y is provided? > > > > > > > > > > > > That avoids the spew but the duplicated GUID is > > > important to know so > > > > IMO something in the "middle" is needed where > duplicated GUIDs are > > > > logged but not continually the same ones. > > > > [EZ] > > > > OK so in -y mode only we track which ones were reported > > > and do not > > > > repeat the log? > > > > > > And how port moving problem should be solved? > > > > > > We cannot ask an user to run OpenSM with '-y' if in > her/his plans to > > > reconnect some ports in a future and just decrease logging. > > > > > > 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
