Tung, Chien Tin wrote:
3) and calls cma_alloc_any_port() to allocate a port number which may not
correspond to the port number for the bound socket.
With the addition of getnam(), sin_port is filled in with the reserved port
number and cma_any_port will evaluate to false and the reserved port
Hi Vlad,
doing
$ rpm -e libsdp-1.1.99-1.ofed1.3.1
error: "libsdp-1.1.99-1.ofed1.3.1" specifies multiple packages
I noted that ofed1.3.x had the practice of installing multiple
packages with the same name! e.g see below the sorting of packages.
So how can I remove a specific package (I don't wan
Scott Weitzenkamp (sweitzen) wrote:
Use "rpm -e --allmatches libsdp-1.1.99-1.ofed1.3.1"?
Thanks, it helped.
Or.
___
ewg mailing list
ewg@lists.openfabrics.org
http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ewg
Eli Cohen wrote:
You mention in Bugzilla an "mckey" test but I don't know this test. Can you
send how to obatain the test and instructions how to build it and run it?
Eli,
mckey is installed with librdmac-utils, has man page, etc. Its source is
under the examples directory of the librdmacm
Woodruff, Robert J wrote:
Yes, in general we have agreed in the EWG that any code that goes into OFED
should first be reviewed and accepted for upstream inclusion (or at least be
accepted by Roland for a future kernel.org kernel.) before it goes into OFED.
Given that the feature freeze for OF
Tziporet Koren wrote:
In any case - if the EoIB code will not be ready it will not be in 1.5
Unlike the IBoE patchset, EoIB is more of a stand alone in the sense
that it adds a driver to the IB stack and generally speaking doesn't
touch other components, where the IBoE patches touch many compon
Gennadiy Nerubayev wrote:
> Running on 2.6.27.21 x64. ofa_kernel build error as follows:
What makes you use ofed on this kernel? if you need newer features, simply
use 2.6.29.1 or newer bits. Also if you still need to use ofed, the place
its worked out is the ewg list @ ewg@lists.openfabrics.or
Mike Aho wrote:
Pradeep and I discussed this. The firmware is 2.3 on the card and will be
moved to the most current level.
sounds like you have the one port hca (Sinai), send the ibv_devinfo output
Or.
___
ewg mailing list
ewg@lists.openfabrics.
Gennadiy Nerubayev wrote:
Well, I need a recent-ish vanilla kernel due to some performance
advantages over stock redhat in some usage scenarios. OFED goes on top
of that because of the ease of installation and use.I know I can
install and use some of the userspace ofed stuff (opensm, utils,
ma
Hi OGC gang,
May you guys spare the general list from your ofed related postings? I
don't see any reason for them to be sent to this list nor how does it
serve you, thx
Or.
Brian M. Rzycki wrote:
I downloaded and installed OFED-1.4.1-rc5.tgz on the machine. I
configured one of the Mellanox
Vladimir Sokolovsky wrote:
Current behavior was specifically defined and coded by Voltaire
I'm still not sure to understand the problem and the proposed solutions,
is it all contained in Woody's email or there's more in some other
threads or bugzilla case/s?
Or.
Tziporet Koren wrote:
Changes from OFED-1.4.1
1 General changes
o Kernel code based on 2.6.30
2 SDP
o Performance improvements
3 uDAPL
o New library
4 Management
o OpenSM
- Mesh Analysis for LASH routing algorithm.
- Reloadable OpenSM configuration (prel
David J. Wilder wrote:
> I am not finding support for ipv6 in rping in the 1.5 beta.
> What is the story for ipv6 support? Is it supported by librdma and
> missing in rping? Is ipv6 in rping planed?
rping supports IPv6 since last year, see the below commit
Or.
> commit 267c28a2f03b8fb63fa9907ba
Eli Cohen wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 09:08:28AM -0700, Sean Hefty wrote:
>> What kernel does 1.4.2 map to?
> I think OFED 1.4.2 is based on kernel 2.6.27 but they're using RHEL 5.3
Yes, the usual mess: ofed X is based on kernel Y1 but with some additions from
kernel Y2 plus plenty of unrevi
Eli Cohen wrote:
Thanks Or. This one is already in OFED 1.4.2 but apparently this is a
different problem. Once I have information whether the patch Roland
posted fixed it I will update the list.
Eli, did you find a commit that fixes the problem you reported on?
Or.
__
Vladimir Sokolovsky wrote:
Can you answer this? Note: Currently, if someone want to use ISER with
kernel < 2.6.30 he can't use OFED-1.5
Hi Vlad, Brian
We're checking this. Basically, I'd like to see people using their
distro iSCSI stack. Now, I am checking what does it take for someone
that c
Or Gerlitz wrote:
Basically, I'd like to see people using their distro iSCSI stack. Now,
I am checking what does it take for someone that chose to replace her
distro provided IB stack with something else (e.g the ofed modules).
Brian,
You (Sun) may basically be in the other side of the
Tung, Chien Tin wrote:
> Please pull from:
>git://sofa.openfabrics.org/~ctung/ofed-1.5.git ofed_kernel_1_5
Chien,
I don't see any of these commits in Linus tree, any reasons to merge them
before a review?
on the other hand, when ofed 1.5 has driver which was never sent upstream (QIB)
a
Tziporet Koren wrote:
Anatoly said yesterday you are testing some solution Can you update
the progress?
not much progress, lets discuss that next week
Or.
___
ewg mailing list
ewg@lists.openfabrics.org
http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/lis
Woodruff, Robert J wrote:
> I think that we need to discuss this in the EWG meeting first as to what
> release the code should go into. Since it has not been accepted upstream
> and as there may be changes needed after the formal spec is released, we
may want
> to consider leaving it in an experim
Eli Cohen wrote:
This new series reflects changes based on feedback from the community on the
previous set of patches, and is tagged v6. Previous series were posted to the
openfabrics general list only.
Changes from v5:
1. Bug fixes.
How do you expect a reviewer to learn what were the bugs and
Richard Frank wrote:
> How can 1500 lines out of 240k lines be a big change.. do I have these
> numbers right
> - is the big change you are referring too?
Rick, the change set is way not self contained but rather touches
various parts of the core IB stack (rdma-cm module, ib address
resolution
> get the RDMAoE code into 1.5, marked as evaluation if that is EWG's assessment
> rather than push it off to 1.6. This is important technology that should not
> be held back
> It would be great if RoCEE were part of 1.5 even if it were
> listed as "evaluation".. for now.
> this is leading edge
> It was disclosed at the BOD meeting that there is no defined
> process for inclusion of new features in OFED releases
facts... the patch set sent from downtown Yoqne'am isn't an addition
of feature but rather pose changes everywhere in the IB stack, so
maybe the BOD should get together again and
facts... the patch set sent from downtown Yoqne'am isn't an addition of feature
turns out that some folks from the Mellanox R&D group found this
sentence insulting, and I am apologizing for that.
Mentioning the geographic location of the developers didn't come to
serve why I find the patch s
Liran Liss wrote:
> The patches don't change the logic of existing flows at all, so we are
> not risking *anything* in terms of the stability of the current stack.
I understand that this is your assessment of the situation, looking on the
series present
at the ofed1.5 rdmaoe branch in a black bo
Pradeep Satyanarayana wrote:
> Pradeep Satyanarayana wrote:
>> Sean, Thanks a lot for pulling it all together. Can we consider
>> including this into OFED-1.5 too?
Tziporet, Sure, we will do it.
Pradeep, earlier you wanted to hear the rdma-cm maintainer opinion on
inclusion of this 2.6.33-rc1
Liran Liss wrote:
> LL: Any comments on our low-level driver are more than welcome.
I see this code in a patch whose commit log has the following "Date: Mon, 3 Aug
2009 18:29:07 +0300" and "Subject: [PATCH 11/13] mlx4: Add support for RDMAoE -
address resolution"
+struct ib_ah *mlx4_ib_create_a
Sean Hefty wrote:
> I will create a new librdmacm package that corresponds with the changes
I made all my testing of the patch set with librdmacm 1.0.10 and
patched 2.6.32-rc5 kernel, where as I wrote you, I was focusing on
AF_INET/PS_TCP and AF_INET/PS_IPOIB.
I understand that Dave was covering
> Changes were your changes to mckey, plus changes Dave added to cmatose to
> support IPv6. The actual library itself hasn't been modified.
okay, got it. I was under the impression that mckey still misses an
option to get from the user an ipv6 multicast address which isn't all
zeros nor unmapped,
Ralph Campbell wrote:
Vlad, please pull from
Ralph, Tziporet, any reason not to wait till this core patch is accepted
to the mainline kernel?
Or.
commit 840bbefeda26d21bffae6b7cdc88e981fcfb0a45
Author: Ralph Campbell (QLogic)
Date: Mon Nov 30 14:09:34 2009 -0800
IB/core: allow HCA
Ralph Campbell wrote:
I don't think this is likely to happen since it fixes Roland's original concern
with exporting struct ib_port
whatever, still its a patch to the core that adds new API, etc, needs to
pass the maintainer acceptance. Its been two weeks since you sent v2, so
a kindly reminde
Or Gerlitz wrote:
> Tziporet, any reason not to wait till this core patch is accepted to the
> mainline kernel?
>
Vlad, Tziporet, any reason not to address my question, silently ignore my
email and just pull this without acking as you usually do, what's the story
beh
Tziporet Koren wrote:
> Yes – we are going for RC4 this week and GA on 21-Dec, so we need all changes
> now so
> we can make sure the new commits are passing install in all OSes we support
whatever, why not replying on my note saying this? you (vlad) are
acking every pull request with the except
Betsy Zeller wrote:
> the agreement in Sonoma was that anything submitted to OFED should
> also be in the process of going into the kernel.
what prevents you from sending a reminder to Roland?
Or.
___
ewg mailing list
ewg@lists.openfabrics.org
http://l
Jon Mason wrote:
Firmware 2.6.0 has known issues that prevent the RDMA connection from being established.
Looking on bz 1815 I couldn't see why you say there are known issues
with connection establishment in firmware 2.6, as the problems there
were around fast reg work requests, have I missed
Tziporet Koren wrote:
> There was a FW bug with FRWR that was fixed in FW 2.7.0 What is not clear
> here?
exactly, the bug has nothing to do with the connection establishment but rather
with fast reg work requests, while the text points towards conn establishment.
Or.
__
Brian,
I am looking on how to enable ofed provided iser to get working with
distros using older then 2.6.30 kernels, I hope to have some update next
week which could be merged into the 1.5.x series .
Or.
___
ewg mailing list
ewg@lists.openfabrics.org
Stefan Kuhne wrote:
> I use it because of i've one package with all i need
ofed is made of twenty or so RPMs, in the same manner that your distro
is made of twenty thousand or so RPMs which you can selectively choose
from. The IB stack RPMs have their dependencies well set and as such
with yum et
Brian J. Murrell wrote:
> How about the ISER/iSCSI on kernels < 2.6.30 situation?
Moni (CC-ed here) will send update on this later today
Or.
___
ewg mailing list
ewg@lists.openfabrics.org
http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ewg
Woodruff, Robert J wrote:
> I am getting the following compile errors
> on today's daily build on Red Hat EL 5.4.
Vlad, as I wrote on before: the RHEL 5.4 iscsi stack has two flavors which you
can think of as the 2.6.18 one and a newer one taken from recent kernels. iser
on RHEL 5.4 uses the new
Vladimir Sokolovsky wrote:
> I will disable iser installation [...] till I get the full tested solution
will do, fair-enough, thanks for your help so far.
Or.
___
ewg mailing list
ewg@lists.openfabrics.org
http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/li
Tziporet Koren wrote:
> - iSER support for distro - should be done by Or
yes, we'll look on this for 1.5.1
Or.
___
ewg mailing list
ewg@lists.openfabrics.org
http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ewg
Sean Hefty wrote:
> If I look at what's there today, we're trying to find some way to match the
> net_device src_dev_addr with some sort of address associated with an
> ib_device.
> In the case of actual IB, the net_device src_dev_addr contains the SGID, which
> provides the mapping.
> Steve, c
Tziporet Koren wrote:
> 1. OFED 1.5.1 ... Release schedule proposal: ... GA - Mar 15, 2010
> My proposal: Plan for 1.5.2 on end of Q2
Tziporet,
Lets try to learn from the experience / troubles caused by XRC being released
through ofed bypassing upstream inclusion and apply the lesson for IBoE.
> The planned schedule is this
> - RC5 - tomorrow Mar 17
> - GA - Monday Mar 22
Ali, Jack, I just came a cross few commits made by two of you to the
ofed 1.5.1 tree, which were'nt sent for review anywhere, is there
something special in these patches which didn't let you send them
upstream? I would
Hi Vlad, Yevgeny
Is there a way to get this fix? AFAIK, this bugzilla system isn't there for
monitoring the Mellanox ofed flavor, isn't it?
Or.
bugzilla-dae...@lists.openfabrics.org wrote:
> https://bugs.openfabrics.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1965
> vent...@mellanox.co.il changed:
>What
Vladimir Sokolovsky wrote:
> I am pleased to announce that OFED-1.5.1 GA release is done
> 11. iSER is supported on kernel.org 2.6.30, 2.6.31 and 2.6.32 only.
this is wrong, we added support for RHEL 5.4, see the iser RN
> 1965,"major","P3","RHEL
> 5","yevge...@mellanox.co.il","RESOLVED","FIXED
Vladimir Sokolovsky wrote:
> Fixed in OFED release notes
thanks.
> Yes, it was fixed in OFED-1.5.1-rc4: See,
> mlx4_en_0220_reconfigure_mac_address.patch
okay, got it.
Or.
___
ewg mailing list
ewg@lists.openfabrics.org
http://lists.openfabrics.org/cg
Vladimir Sokolovsky wrote:
> It was fixed in the OFED-1.5.1-rc4, by the following commit:
> Author: Yevgeny Petrilin
> Date: Wed Mar 10 18:46:55 2010 +0200
> mlx4_en: reconfigure mac address
Hi Yevgeny, I don't see this commit in Linus tree, does this means that the
upstream mlx4_en bits
Or Gerlitz wrote:
> Vladimir Sokolovsky wrote:
>> It was fixed in the OFED-1.5.1-rc4, by the following commit: Author: Yevgeny
>> Petrilin Date: Wed Mar 10 18:46:55 2010 +0200
>> mlx4_en: reconfigure mac address
> Hi Yevgeny, I don't see this commit in Linus t
Yevgeny Petrilin wrote:
> Sure, I am preparing the patches
cool.
Is there anything else in that or close importance level mlx4_en wise which is
in ofed and from some reason wasn't push upstream? e.g I see a patch subject
(0119) saying "Fix a crash with prioritiesed vlan packets" this sounds ba
Tziporet Koren wrote:
> There is a component called Installer already
> Please use it (I already changed in this bug)
Hi Tziporet,
I believe that the problem here isn't in the installation process but rather in
the scripts, with the number of scripts getting bigger, e.g to support dual
IB/Eth
Vladimir Sokolovsky wrote:
> Known issues:
> librdmacm-1.0.12 compilation fails on RHEL4.x
Hi Tziporet,
I don't see any mentioning of IBoE open issues, e.g depicted in ofa bz cases
such as:
bz 2005 "Rocce fails when 1 port is IB and the other is Ethernet"
bz 2024 "bv_rc_pingpong 2 or more clie
Or Gerlitz wrote:
> I don't see any mentioning of IBoE open issues, e.g depicted in ofa bz cases
> such as: bz 2005 "Rocce fails when 1 port is IB and the other is Ethernet" bz
> 2024 "clients fail when global pauses or PPP enabled on switch" bz 2043 "OF
Alekseys Senin wrote:
> + Add new RAW_ETY QP type in order to build RAW Ethernet packets over iWARP
> and RoCEE.
> +--- a/include/rdma/ib_verbs.h
> b/include/rdma/ib_verbs.h
> +@@ -571,6 +571,7 @@ enum ib_qp_type {
> + IB_QPT_UD,
> + IB_QPT_XRC,
> + IB_QPT_RAW_IPV6,
> ++IB_QP
Alekseys Senin wrote:
> This patch adds support to RAW ETH QP in ib core.
are these patches applicable to the mainstream kernel code or would only
apply/function over ofed?
Or.
___
ewg mailing list
ewg@lists.openfabrics.org
http://lists.openfabrics.org/
Moni Shoua wrote:
> The patches can't be applies to upstream kernel. An attempt to do this
> failed. I guess that some of RoCEE patches are still missing in kernel
> upstream.
Eli, can you elaborate on that? is there any real dependence between the
RoCE patches to the raw qp ones? what is this d
Tziporet Koren wrote:
> Hi Or, sorry for not answering before
> Issue 2043 - is already fixed
> Issue 2005 - We released 2.7.700 FW that solve this issue.
> Issue 2024 - Eli just answered in bugzilla.
Hi Tziporet,
1st and most, good to hear from you... thanks for the detailed answer.
Still, for
Eli Cohen wrote:
> I don't know what you're talking about WRT 2043. It's status is "RESOLVED",
> not "VERIFIED". And you may address me directly [...] we'll check about the
> global frames case
Hi Eli, please hold the horses... I was confusing between "resolved" to
"verified", mistakes happen, y
Hi Vlad,
I noted that after uninstalling kernel-ib, the EL5 service script provided by
the distro openib package is gone.
Can this be fixed, such that one can install/uninstall kernel-ib in
non-disruptive manner?
Or.
# rpm -ql openib-1.4.1-3.el5
/etc/ofed
/etc/ofed/fixup-mtrr.awk
/etc/ofed/o
Or Gerlitz wrote:
> Yevgeny Petrilin wrote:
>> Sure, I am preparing the patches
Hi Yevgeny,
I didn't see any posting of patch/es to netdev and there's nothing new in Linus
tree from you since May13, the day you made this comment.
Are you expecting to push the bonding rel
Yevgeny,
I'm forwarding to ewg as it seems your post didn't get there
Or.
--- Begin Message ---
> Or Gerlitz wrote:
> > Yevgeny Petrilin wrote:
> >> Sure, I am preparing the patches
>
> Hi Yevgeny,
>
> I didn't see any posting of patch/es to ne
Tziporet Koren wrote:
> OFED 1.5.3:
> - Mellanox going to update mlx4 driver for the 1.5.3
Hi Tziporet,
What features are you thinking to add in this update?
thanks,
Or.
___
ewg mailing list
ewg@lists.openfabrics.org
http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi
Richard Croucher wrote:
> I've just installed OFED 1.5.2 using your install.pl on two brand new
> servers I'm
> building. Certainly a lot better experience than the last time I did this
> with the standard
> OFED release a few years ago. These were two new freshly build servers with
> OpenSuS
Richard Croucher wrote:
> I've just installed OFED 1.5.2 using your install.pl on two brand new
> servers I'm
> building. Certainly a lot better experience than the last time I did this
> with the standard
> OFED release a few years ago. These were two new freshly build servers with
> OpenSuS
Aleksey Senin wrote:
> IBV_SEND_IP_CSUM added to ibv_send_flags. Should be used to control
> calculation checksum at hardware layer.
what checksum - IB? IP? UDP? TCP? how the caller is supposed
to know if they can set this flag?
> IBV_WC_WITH_VLAN added to ibv_wc_flags, Should be used to add VLA
Tziporet Koren wrote:
>> 1. Do we must have 1.5.3 release?
>> Rational for not having it: we better move as soon as possible to 1.6
>> with new kernel base
>> Rational for having it: We need to add RHEL 6 support, bug fixes, etc.
> Most people think it is important to have it and do not w
fixed spelling mistakes
Signed-off-by: Or Gerlitz
diff --git a/readme_and_howto/ib-bonding.txt b/readme_and_howto/ib-bonding.txt
index 1727d6b..f3d043d 100644
--- a/readme_and_howto/ib-bonding.txt
+++ b/readme_and_howto/ib-bonding.txt
@@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ Update 6 or Update 7) and for Redhat-EL5
2011/3/19 Cheri Winterberg
> Attention all OFA working groups: you may have noticed that openfabrics.org
> has been moved [...] registering yourself on the new site.
Hey, so where's the developers section on the new site, I don't see it
Or.
___
ewg ma
also bring Scot Schultz and Jim Ryan into the
conversation.
I've added Jim, I don't have Scot email's
Or.
-Original Message-----
From: Or Gerlitz [mailto:ogerl...@mellanox.com]
Sent: Monday, March 28, 2011 1:14 PM
To: Ken Strandberg
Cc: Bill Boas; ewg
Subject: RE: [ewg] Web
the past
>
> Jim
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Or Gerlitz [mailto:ogerl...@mellanox.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2011 12:50 AM
> To: Ken Strandberg
> Cc: 'Cheri Winterberg'; 'Bill Boas'; ewg@lists.openfabrics.org; Ryan, Jim
> Subject: Re: [ewg] We
> Yes. I'll pull content over. But it'll take some time.
For the mean time, can you send the direct link into the old website, I need
some materials from Sonoma
2008, 2009 and want to get there, thanks
Or.
___
ewg mailing list
ewg@lists.openfabrics.org
Mike Marciniszyn wrote:
Vlad, Please pull the following patch from ~mmarciniszyn/scm/ofed_1_6/linux-2.6.
Guys, why rushing here? any reason not to wait a minute to see if/what
form of the patch is accepted upstream?
Or.
commit 7fdf362a2fa75cfd46c88ccc8f13a8d72adedb5f
Author: Mitko Haralano
On 4/12/2011 3:45 PM, Mike Marciniszyn wrote:
No rush. We had the patch, tested it, applied it internally, and shared it.
Roland's comment came in after my emails to Vlad.
The point I was trying to make is why not waiting for review/acceptance
for upstream before pushing it further into a stack
Or Gerlitz wrote:
Yes. I'll pull content over. But it'll take some time.
For the mean time, can you send the direct link into the old website, I need
some materials from Sonoma
2008, 2009 and want to get there, thanks
Hi,
I just noted that in the new website you've killed
richard Croucher wrote:
> **
> [...] known issue that you should not configure multiple IP subnets within
> a single partition. Is this problem still current? Is this just following
> IP best practice or does it cause real problems, e.g. with ARP requests
> [...]
>
>
simply put, you should not p
On 10/12/2011 3:28 PM, richard Croucher wrote:
I understand that's it not good practice however I'm seeking to
understand whether actual problems have been observed.
The only issues I can suggest will be because of ARP is in the shared
broadcast domain.Is there any IPoIB state in the SM o
On 12/2/2011 2:04 AM, Hefty, Sean wrote:
We propose a new process for the OFED releases starting from next OFED release:
- OFED content will be the relevant kernel.org modules and user space released
packages
- OFED will offer only backports to the distros (no fixes)
I think this point needs
n't find there any docs? how can new comers to the rdma industry
catch up without all the good old materials / presentations from
2005/6/7/8/9/10 . I have bunch of people asking me questions in various
rdma/IB related issues and I can't point them anywhere.
Or.
-Original Mess
Hi,
Is there a way to provide references to the sessions which doesn't
require registration?
I tried and didn't find out. This is needed now, when we send to the
upstream Linux maintainers the patches which implement things like
user space Ethernet stack - flow steering, RSS/TSS, Ethernet IPoIB
On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 12:59 AM, Ken Strandberg wrote:
> We discontinued registration requirement weeks ago. To see all
> downloadable content, pull down the OFA/OFED RESOURCES menu, pick OFA Doc
> Downloads and pick Presentations or Videos and navigate to the desire area.
> For the last conferen
On 08/09/2012 03:37, Tatyana Nikolova wrote:
Fix for TSO low nic throughput with linux-3.5
skb_is_gso() is changed to bool and returns 1 instead of MSS.
The gso_size from skb_shared_info is now used to pass MSS to hardware.
here's the form of this function from net-next
static inline bool skb
On 20/02/2013 13:54, Hal Rosenstock wrote:
In the case of DOWN ports, rate is meaningless and should be ignored.
should be fixed by 0559d8dc13a1cd68b5e64c0b61659f36c7b5c89f "IB/core:
Don't return EINVAL from sysfs rate attribute for invalid speeds"
__
FC 00/11] Add support for iSCSI Extentions for RDMA (ISER) target
To: target-devel
Cc: linux-rdma , linux-scsi
, Roland Dreier , Or Gerlitz
, Alexander Nezhinsky ,
Nicholas Bellinger
From: Nicholas Bellinger
Hi Folks,
This series is first RFC for iSCSI Extentions for RDMA (ISER) target
su
ULL device, so
we can test the raw iSER wire performance.
Or.
Thanks to Or Gerlitz + Mellanox for supporting the iser-target development
effort!
Thank you,
--nab
Andy Grover (2):
target/iscsi: Remove chap_set_random()
target/iscsi: Use ISCSI_LOGIN_CURRENT/NEXT_STAGE macros
Asias He (1
MAHMOUD HANAFI wrote:
Any one else seen these build error with 1.2rc5?
Baur, Eric wrote:
Yes. The issue seems to be caused by the fact that both 32-bit and
64-bit libs are written to /usr/lib rather than /usr/lib and
/usr/lib64/.
A quick workaround is to modify ofed.conf to only build 64 bit
(
Tziporet Koren wrote:
No one raises this issue in the meeting and there is no open issue in
bugzilla.
In addition in the EWG meeting yesterday we decided that RC6 is going to
be the GA, and that we are stopping the critical bug fixes now.
There will always new bugs and issues but a release shoul
Vladimir Sokolovsky wrote:
The default value of build_32bit is 1 (on ppc64 and x86_64) in case that
glibc-devel-32bit is installed, otherwise 0.
It can be changed from environment by:
export build_32bit=0
./install.sh
...
excellent
In Mellanox most of the servers are installed with glibc-dev
The mechanism for persistent bonding configuration under OFED 1.2 does
not let one to use bonds containing special chars such as '.' or '-'.
This patch documents this and also provide an example of using a
bond that enslaves child interfaces.
signed-off-by: Or Gerli
Tziporet Koren wrote:
Done - but will be seen only if we do a new build
or when the work on ofed-1.2.c starts in the ewg framework
Or.
___
ewg mailing list
ewg@lists.openfabrics.org
http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ewg
Roland Dreier wrote:
> This comment is aligned with OFED development methodology.
> Regarding all kernel modules that are part of Linux: we first push the
> change to the kernel and base OFED on this code.
> We take kernel patches for bug fixes and portions that are targeted
> for the kerne
Tziporet Koren wrote:
Our OEMs requested that OFED 1.2.c development will be done in the open
(instead of tarball from Mellanox as done so far)
Now this is enabled, with daily build under
http://www.openfabrics.org/builds/connectx/
Tziporet,
I suggest that problem/bug reports would also move
Tziporet Koren wrote:
Or Gerlitz wrote:
I suggest that problem/bug reports would also move from private
threads to the EWG mailing list (problems) and the ofed bugzilla
(bugs), what do you say?
If its fine with you, lets open an 1.2.c version in the bugzilla.
This is an issue since many
Tom Tucker wrote:
Perhaps the activity is not where you're used to looking. Both Trond and
Neal reviewed the previous patchset and provided feedback that I
addressed in the most recent patchset. That said, I'm sure there will be
quite a bit more before it's mergeable.
Indeed, any other IB rela
Scott Weitzenkamp (sweitzen) wrote:
It will be good if we can unify 1.2.c with 1.2.1 that was
requested in
the same time frame
Any thoughts on this?
I am in favor of unifying them.
I don't see how 1.2.c can be official OFED release without having the
work process being tracked through the
Tziporet Koren wrote:
Or Gerlitz wrote:
This is the point of adding 1.2.c to bugzilla (I actually just send a
direct mail to Scott requesting this)
OK, thanks.
Need to add mlx4 as a component too
who has the permission to do so?
Searching for mlx4 or connectx under the
Tziporet Koren wrote:
2. Agree on OFED 1.3 schedule:
* Feature freeze - Sep 4
Must have general features:
* QoS: OSM, CM, CMA, ULPs (IPoIB, SDP, SRP)
Tziporet,
As was stated by Moni in the meetings, we want the QoS implementation to
first pass review on the
Tziporet Koren wrote:
Or Gerlitz wrote:
* QoS: OSM, CM, CMA, ULPs (IPoIB, SDP, SRP)
Must have general features:
Tziporet,
As was stated by Moni in the meetings, we want the QoS implementation
to first pass review on the general list (aka "ofa") and be ac
All,
The OFA bugzilla has --254-- bugs whose status is "resolved" where for most of
them the resolution is "fixed". The current time frame, just before the work
on OFED 1.3 starts, is a good period to have some house cleanup.
Basically, I think the way to go is that people would do a search on t
1 - 100 of 233 matches
Mail list logo
