Hi Slava,
On 09:42 Mon 02 Nov , Slava Strebkov wrote:
> Proposed new algorithm for calculation of root switch for multicast
> spanning tree. Only edge switches(those connected to hosts) and
> switches - multicast members themselves are involved in root calculation.
> This gives improvement, es
Hi Ralph,
On 11:56 Thu 05 Nov , Ralph Campbell wrote:
> This patch adds new commands to ibportstate to support initializing
> the link for CAs connected back-to-back. It also allows more than
> one field to be changed at the same time such as "lid 23 arm" or
> "width 1 speed 3 enable".
As far
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009, Sean Hefty wrote:
That's what I suspected. I wonder if the connection state isn't set
properly until later? I'm really not sure. Without a kernel debugger
it'll be hard to determine. I guess I can throw some printfs in to track
this down unless there are better suggestio
> > diff --git a/include/infiniband/verbs.h b/include/infiniband/verbs.h
> > index 07d4395..f7fe68d 100644
> > --- a/include/infiniband/verbs.h
> > +++ b/include/infiniband/verbs.h
> > @@ -192,7 +192,7 @@ struct ibv_port_attr {
> > uint8_t active_width;
> > ui
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 11:50 AM, Sasha Khapyorsky wrote:
> On 14:35 Fri 06 Nov , Hal Rosenstock wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 1:02 PM, Sasha Khapyorsky wrote:
>> > On 09:10 Fri 06 Nov , Hal Rosenstock wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Per published MgtWG erratum RefID 4576
>> >
>> > Please describe
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 11:36 AM, Sasha Khapyorsky wrote:
> On 10:35 Mon 16 Nov , Hal Rosenstock wrote:
>> >
>> > Unlike previous solution where all IPv6 Solicited node multicast (SNM)
>> > requests were collapsed into a single multicast group in OpenSM, now
>> > each IPv6 SNM group is represe
On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 10:50:02AM -0800, Roland Dreier wrote:
>
> > If we change struct ibv_port_attr transport field from enum to uint8,
> > we eliminate binary compatibility problems. That's because the previous
> > filed is aligned to 16 bits address so that leaves us 16 bits more.
> >
>
> If we change struct ibv_port_attr transport field from enum to uint8,
> we eliminate binary compatibility problems. That's because the previous
> filed is aligned to 16 bits address so that leaves us 16 bits more.
>
> diff --git a/include/infiniband/verbs.h b/include/infiniband/verbs.h
>
On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 03:34:06PM +0200, Eli Cohen wrote:
> If we change struct ibv_port_attr transport field from enum to uint8,
> we eliminate binary compatibility problems. That's because the previous
> filed is aligned to 16 bits address so that leaves us 16 bits more.
Dealing with ABI compa
Fix compilation error of that was introduced with patch
that added configurable transaction retries - osm_vendor_mlx
didn't have a definition of OSM_DEFAULT_RETRY_COUNT.
Signed-off-by: Yevgeny Kliteynik
---
opensm/include/vendor/osm_vendor_mlx.h |3 +++
opensm/include/vendor/osm_vendor_
Eliminate bunch of compilation warnings in printing
64-bit values to log.
Signed-off-by: Yevgeny Kliteynik
---
opensm/libvendor/osm_vendor_mlx_txn.c | 33 +++--
1 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
diff --git a/opensm/libvendor/osm_vendor_mlx_txn.c
b
Per my prior question: is it expected that IBoE will function
*exactly* the same as real IB? The addition of the port attribute
seems to imply not.
Additionally, per Jason's question, why not simply expose this as an
additional device? E.g., can you APM across a real IB port and an
IBoE
Sorry -- I replied from my PDA last week but the list rejected the mail.
All I have is what was sent to the OMPI list (although I see Pasha
attached the patch in a later mail on this thread). Note that we
(OMPI) tend to operate a bit differently than OpenFabrics -- we don't
typically send
On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 05:11:36PM -0700, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 06:23:15PM -0500, Jeff Squyres wrote:
>
> > 2. I am somewhat confused by the overloading of the term "transport".
> > It appears that a device will have
> > ibv_device.transport_type==IBV_TRANSPORT_IB f
Hi Roland,
Yes, you're right. The loop below is a fallback to detect possibly missing
irq events
by checking the eq pointer, which can be changed by irq handler.
@Anton, for above reason we can not remove the lock/unlock within the loop.
Thanks,
Nam
Roland Dreier wrote on 30.11.2009 06:26:35:
>
15 matches
Mail list logo
