Hi Nitin,
On Tue, 2005-03-15 at 16:15, Nitin Hande wrote:
> This is cool, I have got Solaris IPoIB happily working with the
> OpenSM now. It plumbs, pings and snoops on 0x pkey.
Great. That's good news. I'll work on a real fix for this now.
> On other hand, on my linux node, if I try to use
Nitin> On other hand, on my linux node, if I try to use 8001
Nitin> partition and configure IB interface with IP addr (same
Nitin> time while ib0 is using 0x pkey), I get the following
Nitin> error, you may want to investigate that
I think this is probably an OpenSM issue (
ast join failed for ff12:401b:8001:0:0:0::,
status -22
Thanks
Nitin
>
>
> -Forwarded Message-
>
> From: Hal Rosenstock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Nitin Hande <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: openib , Tom Duffy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subjec
) goto
Exit;
-Forwarded Message-
From: Hal Rosenstock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Nitin Hande <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: openib , Tom Duffy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [openib-general] Solaris IPoIB MTU with OpenSM
Date: 24 Feb 2005 08:42:23 -0500
Hi Nitin,
On Wed, 2005
Hi Nitin,
On Wed, 2005-02-23 at 17:19, Nitin Hande wrote:
> Hal,
>
> [comments below]
> On Wed, 2005-02-23 at 02:19, Hal Rosenstock wrote:
> > On Tue, 2005-02-22 at 22:56, Nitin Hande wrote:
> > > So I tried the latest patches and preliminarily things seem to be
> > > working fine.
> >
> > Yip
Hal,
[comments below]
On Wed, 2005-02-23 at 02:19, Hal Rosenstock wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-02-22 at 22:56, Nitin Hande wrote:
> > So I tried the latest patches and preliminarily things seem to be
> > working fine.
>
> Yipee.
[snip..]
>
> >
> > So after this test above, I try to run snoop on the
On Tue, 2005-02-22 at 22:56, Nitin Hande wrote:
> So I tried the latest patches and preliminarily things seem to be
> working fine.
Yipee.
> The PathRecord response is successful and so is the MTU
> correct. I need to spend some more time looking at MAD and confirm it. I
> could configure both i
Hal,
On Thu, 2005-02-17 at 13:12, Hal Rosenstock wrote:
> Hi Nitin,
>
> On Wed, 2005-02-16 at 17:33, Nitin Hande wrote:
> > On Wed, 2005-02-16 at 13:26, Hal Rosenstock wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2005-02-16 at 16:08, Nitin Hande wrote:
> > > > Hal,
> > [snip..]
[snip...]
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> > Bef
Hi Nitin,
On Wed, 2005-02-16 at 17:33, Nitin Hande wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-02-16 at 13:26, Hal Rosenstock wrote:
> > On Wed, 2005-02-16 at 16:08, Nitin Hande wrote:
> > > Hal,
> [snip..]
> > >
> > >
> > > Here is the trace of 256 sized MTU:
> > >
> > > Outgoing MAD:
> > > BaseVersion: 0x
On Wed, 2005-02-16 at 13:26, Hal Rosenstock wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-02-16 at 16:08, Nitin Hande wrote:
> > Hal,
[snip..]
> >
> >
> > Here is the trace of 256 sized MTU:
> >
> > Outgoing MAD:
> > BaseVersion: 0x1
> > MgmtClass: 0x3 - SubnAdm
> > ClassVersion: 0x2
> >
On Wed, 2005-02-16 at 16:08, Nitin Hande wrote:
> Hal,
>
> On Wed, 2005-02-16 at 06:27, Hal Rosenstock wrote:
> > On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 16:36, Nitin Hande wrote:
> > > I have a hunch for whats happening here, but before I jump into any
> > > conclusions, I am seeing some other issue between Solari
Hal,
On Wed, 2005-02-16 at 06:27, Hal Rosenstock wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 16:36, Nitin Hande wrote:
> > I have a hunch for whats happening here, but before I jump into any
> > conclusions, I am seeing some other issue between Solaris IPoIB driver
> > and OpenSM. After joining the Broadcast g
On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 16:36, Nitin Hande wrote:
> I have a hunch for whats happening here, but before I jump into any
> conclusions, I am seeing some other issue between Solaris IPoIB driver
> and OpenSM. After joining the Broadcast group, the PathRecord Response
> coming from OpenSM signals an err
On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 15:57, Hal Rosenstock wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 17:45, Nitin Hande wrote:
> > Here is the osm log, I think we may have a lead, the dest GID is wrong:
> > :
> >
> > Feb 15 23:29:57 [43005960] -> osm_sm_mcgrp_join: Port 0x0002c901097651d1
> > joining MLID 0xC001.
> > Feb
On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 17:45, Nitin Hande wrote:
> Here is the osm log, I think we may have a lead, the dest GID is wrong:
> :
>
> Feb 15 23:29:57 [43005960] -> osm_sm_mcgrp_join: Port 0x0002c901097651d1
> joining MLID 0xC001.
> Feb 15 23:29:57 [43005960] -> __osm_pr_rcv_get_end_points: No dest po
On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 13:45, Hal Rosenstock wrote:
> Hi again Nitin,
>
> On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 16:36, Nitin Hande wrote:
> > After joining the Broadcast group, the PathRecord Response
> > coming from OpenSM signals an error with Invalid GUID. I wonder why,
>
> There appear to be only 2 places in
Hi Nitin,
On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 16:45, Hal Rosenstock wrote:
> Can you look in the osm.log to see if the source or dest GID is
> implicated ? This will help me chase it down. Thanks.
Both SGID and DGID are in the component mask but my bet is on the DGID.
OpenSM does not currently support PathReco
Hi again Nitin,
On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 16:36, Nitin Hande wrote:
> After joining the Broadcast group, the PathRecord Response
> coming from OpenSM signals an error with Invalid GUID. I wonder why,
There appear to be only 2 places in the code (I'm not saying the code is
right) where this can occur.
On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 16:36, Nitin Hande wrote:
> I have a hunch for whats happening here,
Glad to hear this as I don't have a clue :-)
> but before I jump into any
> conclusions, I am seeing some other issue between Solaris IPoIB driver
> and OpenSM. After joining the Broadcast group, the PathR
I have a hunch for whats happening here, but before I jump into any
conclusions, I am seeing some other issue between Solaris IPoIB driver
and OpenSM. After joining the Broadcast group, the PathRecord Response
coming from OpenSM signals an error with Invalid GUID. I wonder why,
Here is the mad trac
Hi,
Unfortunately, the Solaris 10 IPoIB MTU with OpenSM is back to the
maximum size of 252 again :-( I'm not sure whether this was ever really
fixed although I do now see the packets indicating an exact MTU of 4
(2048 bytes). I'm not sure what Solaris doesn't like about the OpenSM
response to the
21 matches
Mail list logo
