On 00:00 Thu 20 Nov , Yevgeny Kliteynik wrote: > Sasha Khapyorsky wrote: >> Hi Yevgeny, >> On 11:51 Wed 19 Nov , Yevgeny Kliteynik wrote: >>> Hi Sasha, >>> >>> When there are errors during initialization and new >>> heavy sweep is forced, unicast cache might hold a >>> snapshot of the previous routing, and since there >>> might be no *topology* changes, ucast cache will >>> apply that cached routing, which might be wrong. >>> >>> This patch invalidates cache explicitly if there >>> were initialization errors in addition to few other >>> cases. >>> >>> This fix addresses bug #1398. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Yevgeny Kliteynik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> --- >>> opensm/opensm/osm_state_mgr.c | 16 ++++++++++++---- >>> 1 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/opensm/opensm/osm_state_mgr.c >>> b/opensm/opensm/osm_state_mgr.c >>> index 841438c..d00e8ff 100644 >>> --- a/opensm/opensm/osm_state_mgr.c >>> +++ b/opensm/opensm/osm_state_mgr.c >>> @@ -1064,6 +1064,18 @@ static void do_sweep(osm_sm_t * sm) >>> } >>> >>> /* >>> + * Unicast cache should be invalidated if: >>> + * - every sweep is a heavy sweep >>> + * - there were errors during initialization >>> + * - subnet re-route is requested >>> + */ >>> + if (sm->p_subn->opt.use_ucast_cache && >>> + (sm->p_subn->opt.force_heavy_sweep || >> Why 'opt.force_heavy_sweep' should be there? It is possible to enforce >> heavy sweep without routing cache just by using: >> opt.force_heavy_sweep TRUE >> opt.use_ucast_cache FALSE > > Well, it doesn't have to be there. > The opt.force_heavy_sweep is kind of debug mode of opensm, > so I just wanted to disable cache in that case. > Want me to remove it and repost the patch?
Yes, please. 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
