On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 2:56 PM, Yossi Etigin <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 31/07/09 19:58, Todd Rimmer wrote: > >> Yossi Etigin wrote: > > > >> What if we query the remote port LMC once, when the path is resolved, > >> and then > >> use it to mask the LID until the path is refreshed again? > > > > Doing the LMC query when the PathRecord query is made makes, sense. > > > > I assume you are proposing a query of the SA for the PortInfoRecord? > > > > Note that a direct query of the remote SMA would be a bad idea and has at > least the following issues: > > 1. There are limited VL15 queuing resources and no VL15 flow control, > hence if multiple nodes queried the same SMA at the same time, packet loss > could be significant which would impact SM operation as well (note how > carefully the recent opensm work for parallel queries has had to tune > operations to SMAs) > > 2. If MKey security is enabled, the client will not (and should not) know > the MKey of the remote SMA and hence can't make a query. > > 3. The intent of the IB Architecture is for the SM to be the only entity > which interacts with SMAs. A handful of diagnostic tools (like ibdiagnet) > may be an acceptable exception, but it would not be recommended to make > non-SM queries of an SMA as part of a normal protocol. > > > > Actually I wasn't sure which is better, but given all these issues SM > should be the one and not the SA. > > Do you mean SA rather than SM ?
_______________________________________________ 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
