> From: Ishai Rabinovitz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [openib-general] [PATCH] IB/SRP Userspace:
> srptools/srp_daemon - Fix connect bug and add support for
> user specified initiator extension
>
> Thanks for your patch.
>
> I agree with some of the changes you suggest and disagree
> From: Mirochnick Natalia [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [openib-general] srp trouble on RHEL4 U4
>
> I've changed the string as you've advised, but it didn't
> work. The only
> difference is that string "" was added in /var/log/messages.
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] echo -n
> id_ext=
>> Madhu Lakshmanan wrote:
>> Which SRP target are you using? Could you also give some more
>> details on
>> the fabric setup; i.e. what IB switch / gateway your host is
connected
>> to, and what kind of storage you wish to access? The full command
that
>> you used (echo -n > /add_target)
Which SRP target are you using? Could you also give some more details on
the fabric setup; i.e. what IB switch / gateway your host is connected
to, and what kind of storage you wish to access? The full command that
you used (echo -n > /add_target) to configure the SRP target
would be very
The patch addresses 3 issues:
1. Fixes bug in srp_daemon for the case where if it is invoked with the
'-e' option, it fails to connect to the SRP targets because of a newline
character in the parameter string.
2. Changes the name of the constant 'MAX_TRAGET_CONFIG_STR_STRING' to
'MAX_TARGET_CONFIG_
> From: Michael S. Tsirkin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Quoting r. Lakshmanan, Madhu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > Subject: RE: FW: [PATCH fixed] [RFC] IB/srp: enable multiple
connections
> to the same target
> >
> > > > I tested the patches, w
> From: Scott Weitzenkamp (sweitzen) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> I am also having new problems configuring SRP with OFED 1.1 rc7, I
have
> asked Roland to take a look on my test networks.
>
> Scott Weitzenkamp
>
I had to add the following string to the parameters that are echo'ed to
'/sys/cla
> > I tested the patches, which are included in OFED 1.1 RC7, against
> > Silverstorm SRP targets. The patch breaks backward compatibility for
> > fabrics that use Silverstorm targets, due to the following:
> >
> > It defaults the new parameter "initiator_ext" to 0. Silverstorm SRP
> > targets, whe
Quoting r. Roland Dreier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Thanks, queued for 2.6.19
I tested the patches, which are included in OFED 1.1 RC7, against
Silverstorm SRP targets. The patch breaks backward compatibility for
fabrics that use Silverstorm targets, due to the following:
It defaults the new paramete
> Enable multiple concurrent connections to the same SRP target
>
> 1) Use port guid instead of node guid in the initiator port
identifier.
> 2) Let the user specify the identifier extention when adding the
device.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ishai Rabinovitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Signed-off-by: Michael S.
Ramachandra> In that case, can you please consider this for the
Ramachandra> for-2.6.20 branch ?
> I'm happy to keep this in a vex branch or something like that, but as
> the emails I just sent show, this is not ready for merging yet (which
> is to be expected -- it's never been reviewed).
> Quoting r. Michael S. Tsirkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Subject: RE: [openib-general] [PATCH] IB/SRP: Enable multichannel
> >Quoting r. Lakshmanan, Madhu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >Subject: RE: [openib-general] [PATCH] IB/SRP: Enable multichannel
> >
>
Quoting r. Vu Pham [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] IB/SRP: Enable multichannel
> What is the advantage to have multiple connections/qps on the same
>physical port to the same target? The disavantages are wasting
resources, >instability, no fail-over on physical port error...
The advanta
>> Roland Dreier wrote:
>> Maybe we should just use the port GUID instead of the node GUID to
>> form the initiator ID? That would solve this pretty cleanly I think.
> This is also Vu's idea.
>
> There are two issues:
>
> 1) My patch allows a sophisticated user to have two logical
connections on
PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 4:39 PM
To: Lakshmanan, Madhu; Michael S. Tsirkin
Cc: openib-general@openib.org
Subject: RE: Conflicting typedefs for "ib_gid_t"
To answer your questions:
I'm not totally sure about your application but it seems to me to fall
in the category
In .../include/infiniband/mad.h, it is:
typedef uint8_t ib_gid_t[16];
In .../include/infiniband/iba/ib_types.h, it is:
#include
typedef union _ib_gid
{
uint8_t raw[16];
struct _ib_gid_unicast
{
ib_gid_prefix_t prefix;
ib_net64_t
16 matches
Mail list logo
