On 10/19/2011 1:05 AM, Or Gerlitz wrote:
in few hours I will be next to the code...
The theory failed, looking on commit
577818b50990853bf112ba2a2c336020dd278622 "Update examples for IBoE"
it doesn't change the default message size for the ud pingpong, so we
have to dig deeper, Christoph,
can
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 12:52 AM, Roland Dreier wrote:
> Do you understand why -s 100 fixes things? If so can you explain it to me? ;)
Oh sorry if I was a bit cryptic here (BTW 99 and 101 and 256,512,2048 would
work as well...), I'm not next to the code and writing from backoffice my
head cache
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 3:13 PM, Or Gerlitz wrote:
>> -s 100 fixes the issue.
>
> Good to know! I'll take a look into whether/how we could improve this
> little but annoying incompatibility...
Do you understand why -s 100 fixes things? If so can you explain it to me? ;)
- R.
--
To unsubscribe
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 5:14 PM, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> -s 100 fixes the issue.
Good to know! I'll take a look into whether/how we could improve this
little but annoying incompatibility...
Or.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in
the body of a messa
On Mon, 17 Oct 2011, Or Gerlitz wrote:
> Could you try that again with small msg size e.g use "-s 100", if that
> doesn't help
> can you send the output of "ibv_devinfo" from both nodes. Also please
> specify the exact top commit of the two libraries (libibverbs and I
> assume libmlx4 if you use M
On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 4:02 PM, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> Running ibv_ud_pingpong and ibc_uc_pingpong between two hosts. One with
> OFED 1.5.3.1 (Ubuntu LTS 10.04) and another on linux 3.1.0-rc9 (Same
> ubuntu version uderlying) with the upstream libraries.
> ibv_ud_pingpong
> OFED:
> # ibv_ud_p
> I wonder how important wire compatibilty of the ibv_xx_pingpong
> examples is... should I worry about this?
I know that for some of the larger clusters, they may not be able to upgrade
the software on all systems during a scheduled downtime. This is about the
only reason I can think of why yo
On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 9:36 AM, Hefty, Sean wrote:
> Actually, mine did too. I wonder if this OFED patch to libibverbs is causing
> the issue:
>
> http://git.openfabrics.org/git?p=ofed_1_5/libibverbs.git;a=blob;f=fixes/rocee_examples.patch;h=eda5a401a3424a104e8100848b5b6bf4e5b63bee;hb=HEAD
Hmm
> Our 3.1-rc9 included Rolands for-next branch.
Actually, mine did too. I wonder if this OFED patch to libibverbs is causing
the issue:
http://git.openfabrics.org/git?p=ofed_1_5/libibverbs.git;a=blob;f=fixes/rocee_examples.patch;h=eda5a401a3424a104e8100848b5b6bf4e5b63bee;hb=HEAD
--
To unsubscri
On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 9:31 AM, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> Our 3.1-rc9 included Rolands for-next branch.
There are a few RDMA-related changes there :)
A bisect from 3.1-rc9 to my for-next branch shouldn't take too long if
you get chance,
otherwise I'll try to take a look soon.
This is with mlx
On Fri, 14 Oct 2011, Hefty, Sean wrote:
> > Running ibv_ud_pingpong and ibc_uc_pingpong between two hosts. One with
> > OFED 1.5.3.1 (Ubuntu LTS 10.04) and another on linux 3.1.0-rc9 (Same
> > ubuntu version uderlying) with the upstream libraries.
>
> FWIW, I was able to run 3.1-rc9 in loopback an
> Running ibv_ud_pingpong and ibc_uc_pingpong between two hosts. One with
> OFED 1.5.3.1 (Ubuntu LTS 10.04) and another on linux 3.1.0-rc9 (Same
> ubuntu version uderlying) with the upstream libraries.
FWIW, I was able to run 3.1-rc9 in loopback and between 3.0 and 3.1-rc9
systems. I don't have
Running ibv_ud_pingpong and ibc_uc_pingpong between two hosts. One with
OFED 1.5.3.1 (Ubuntu LTS 10.04) and another on linux 3.1.0-rc9 (Same
ubuntu version uderlying) with the upstream libraries.
ibv_uc_pingpong
OFED:
# ibv_uc_pingpong
local address: LID 0x000a, QPN 0x54004d, PSN 0x00637e, GI
13 matches
Mail list logo
