Hi,

I've just run a few tests with your patch using io_guid_files and reverse_hops 
and it seems your patch introduces a bug.
We have a function to calculate the number per link and if I apply this patch 
it never returns which usually means there is a loop in the routing scheme.

I have had a quick look at your code.
One thing I'm not sure of is that when a reverse hop is done you increment both 
the reverse_hop counter and the current_hops one. Which mean when the hops 
count is calculate for sw_set_hops it is bigger than it is supposed to be.


What should probably be done is increment both but only use current_hops to 
calculate the number of hops done. reverse_hop will only be used to check if 
there are still reverse_hop credits left or not (which was its original 
purpose).

By changing the hops count in both call to set_hops_on_remote_sw  to 
current_hops+1 and not current_hops+1 +2* reverse_hops, routing has no loops 
but results are different (some links are more loaded).
I'll run some more tests to see if I can figure this out.


Nicolas

Le 27/05/2009 12:07, [email protected] a écrit :
> This patch makes it legal to have cross links (horizontal links) between
> switches at max rank. These switches do have same rank, so hop count cannot
> be calculated based on rank anymore.
> The horizontal links are treated as downlinks. Switch A has a downlink to B
> while B has a downlink to A. Tests on lids and also number of hops makes sure
> that we don't loop back and forth across the link.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Frank Olaf Sem-Jacobsen <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Line Holen <[email protected]>
> 
_______________________________________________
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

Reply via email to