On 08/16/13 15:47, Hal Rosenstock wrote:
On 8/14/2013 6:26 AM, Line Holen wrote:
Signed-off-by: Line Holen<line.ho...@oracle.com>
---
diff --git a/opensm/osm_port_info_rcv.c b/opensm/osm_port_info_rcv.c
index 7dcd15e..961b376 100644
--- a/opensm/osm_port_info_rcv.c
+++ b/opensm/osm_port_info_rcv.c
@@ -85,7 +85,7 @@ static void pi_rcv_process_endport(IN osm_sm_t * sm, IN
osm_physp_t * p_physp,
osm_madw_context_t context;
ib_api_status_t status;
ib_net64_t port_guid;
- uint8_t rate, mtu;
+ uint8_t rate, mtu, mpb;
unsigned data_vls;
cl_qmap_t *p_sm_tbl;
osm_remote_sm_t *p_sm;
@@ -126,6 +126,14 @@ static void pi_rcv_process_endport(IN osm_sm_t * sm, IN
osm_physp_t * p_physp,
}
}
+ /* Check M_Key vs M_Key protect, can we control the port ? */
+ mpb = ib_port_info_get_mpb(p_pi);
+ if (mpb> 0&& p_pi->m_key == 0) {
+ OSM_LOG(sm->p_log, OSM_LOG_INFO,
+ "Port 0x%" PRIx64 " has unknown M_Key, protection level
%u\n",
+ cl_ntoh64(port_guid), mpb);
+ }
+
It looks to me like the only case here is when protect bits is 1 for
gets; all others fail. Is it more than that ?
You are probably right - have to admit I haven't tried a higher
protection level.
Also, would this spam the OpenSM log ?
It would print one additional message per heavy sweep.
But if you have a system with unknown MKeys configured you would get
many error
messages as it is. With protection level 2 every MAD operation will generate
an error I guess (either 3111 or 3120). And with protection level 1 set
operations
will fail, but this new message will let you know why it failed.
Line
-- Hal
if (port_guid != sm->p_subn->sm_port_guid) {
p_sm_tbl =&sm->p_subn->sm_guid_tbl;
if (p_pi->capability_mask& IB_PORT_CAP_IS_SM) {
--
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
