Hi Hal,
On Mon, 2010-05-24 at 12:03 -0600, Hal Rosenstock wrote:
> Hi Jim,
>
> On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 4:29 PM, Jim Schutt <jasc...@sandia.gov> wrote:
> >
> > Sorry, I somehow got this wrong.
> >
> > Corrected patch below.
> >
> > -- Jim
> >
> > On Fri, 2010-05-21 at 14:18 -0600, Jim Schutt wrote:
> >> Before commit 051a1dd5 (opensm/osm_qos.c: split switch external and end
> >> ports setup), osm_qos_setup() would end up calling sl2vl_update_table()
> >> for output ports 1-N, and inport ports 0-N.
> >>
> >> Commit 051a1dd5 changed this around to be output ports 0-N, and input
> >> ports 1-N, and an InfiniScale IV based fabric would log lots of errors
> >> like these:
> >>
> >> log_rcv_cb_error: ERR 3111: Received MAD with error status = 0x1C
> >> SubnGetResp(SLtoVLMappingTable), attr_mod 0x2300, TID 0xad069
> >> Initial path: 0,1,1,4,13 Return path: 0,25,1,7,10
> >>
> >> The attr_mod in every such message has 0x00 in the least significant
> >> byte.
>
> This is the output port.
>
> >> With the port ranges restored to their old values, the above log messages
> >> stop.
>
> Is this with base or enhanced port 0 ? I'm assuming base. See comment below.
See extra patch below.
>
> Also, what firmware version is in use ?
flint reports the FW version as 7.2.0
>
> >> Signed-off-by: Jim Schutt <jasc...@sandia.gov>
> >> ---
> >> opensm/opensm/osm_qos.c | 8 ++++----
> >> 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/opensm/opensm/osm_qos.c b/opensm/opensm/osm_qos.c
> >> index 6bbbfa2..b8c3111 100644
> >> --- a/opensm/opensm/osm_qos.c
> >> +++ b/opensm/opensm/osm_qos.c
> >> @@ -230,12 +230,12 @@ static int qos_extports_setup(osm_sm_t * sm,
> >> osm_node_t *node,
> >> &qcfg->sl2vl);
> >> }
> >>
> >> - for (i = 1; i < num_ports; i++) {
> >> + for (i = 0; i < num_ports; i++) {
> >> p = osm_node_get_physp_ptr(node, i);
> >> force_update = p->need_update || sm->p_subn->need_update;
> >> - for (j = 0; j < num_ports; j++)
> >> - if (sl2vl_update_table(sm, p, i, i << 8 | j,
> >> - force_update, &qcfg->sl2vl))
> >> + for (j = 1; j < num_ports; j++)
> >> + if (sl2vl_update_table(sm, p, i, j, force_update,
> >> + &qcfg->sl2vl))
> >> ret = -1;
> >> }
> >>
> >
> > diff --git a/opensm/opensm/osm_qos.c b/opensm/opensm/osm_qos.c
> > index 6bbbfa2..7d76c75 100644
> > @@ -230,10 +230,10 @@ static int qos_extports_setup(osm_sm_t * sm,
> > osm_node_t *node,
> > &qcfg->sl2vl);
> > }
> >
> > - for (i = 1; i < num_ports; i++) {
> > + for (i = 0; i < num_ports; i++) {
> > p = osm_node_get_physp_ptr(node, i);
> > force_update = p->need_update || sm->p_subn->need_update;
> > - for (j = 0; j < num_ports; j++)
> > + for (j = 1; j < num_ports; j++)
> > if (sl2vl_update_table(sm, p, i, i << 8 | j,
> > force_update, &qcfg->sl2vl))
> > ret = -1;
> >
>
> I think the start for j depends on whether it is base or enhanced port
> 0. Start should be 0 for enhanced and 1 for base.
Ah. I see now in the IBA 1.2.1 spec, Table 146 PortInfo, p 837, that
only an enhanced SP0 supports OperationalVLs. So if a base SP0 doesn't
support it, such port also doesn't support VLs, and it makes sense that
you shouldn't attempt to program SL2VL maps.
Is that what you're thinking?
I added this patch on top of above, and things still work w/ no
error messages. I guess that means our InfiniSwitch IV gear has
only base SP0.
--- a/opensm/opensm/osm_qos.c
+++ b/opensm/opensm/osm_qos.c
@@ -233,7 +233,8 @@ static int qos_extports_setup(osm_sm_t * sm, osm_node_t
*node,
for (i = 0; i < num_ports; i++) {
p = osm_node_get_physp_ptr(node, i);
force_update = p->need_update || sm->p_subn->need_update;
- for (j = 1; j < num_ports; j++)
+ j = ib_switch_info_is_enhanced_port0(&node->sw->switch_info) ?
0 : 1;
+ for (; j < num_ports; j++)
if (sl2vl_update_table(sm, p, i, i << 8 | j,
force_update, &qcfg->sl2vl))
ret = -1;
Does that look OK to you?
Thanks -- Jim
>
> -- Hal
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
