Yevgeny Kliteynik wrote:
> On 15-Jun-10 10:09 AM, Eli Dorfman (Voltaire) wrote:
>> Yevgeny Kliteynik wrote:
>>> Eli,
>>>
>>> On 13-Jun-10 6:10 PM, Eli Dorfman (Voltaire) wrote:
>>>> After a second thought and in order not to break current configuration,
>>>> I send this modified patch that does not change connect_roots option
>>>> but
>>>> changes its functionality in up-down (I think that in fat-tree it is
>>>> already implemented)
>>>>
>>>> Modify connect_roots option to allow connectivity between
>>>> all switches in up-down routing algorithm and in this way be
>>>> fully IBA compliant
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Eli Dorfman<e...@voltaire.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> opensm/man/opensm.8.in | 2 +-
>>>> opensm/opensm/main.c | 2 +-
>>>> opensm/opensm/osm_ucast_updn.c | 4 +---
>>>> 3 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/opensm/man/opensm.8.in b/opensm/man/opensm.8.in
>>>> index 9053611..c67126e 100644
>>>> --- a/opensm/man/opensm.8.in
>>>> +++ b/opensm/man/opensm.8.in
>>>> @@ -174,7 +174,7 @@ the host comes back online.
>>>> .TP
>>>> \fB\-z\fR, \fB\-\-connect_roots\fR
>>>> This option enforces routing engines (up/down and
>>>> -fat-tree) to make connectivity between root switches and in
>>>> +fat-tree) to make connectivity between all switches and in
>>>> this way to be fully IBA complaint. In many cases this can
>>>> violate "pure" deadlock free algorithm, so use it carefully.
>>>> .TP
>>>> diff --git a/opensm/opensm/main.c b/opensm/opensm/main.c
>>>> index 0093aa7..82ca78f 100644
>>>> --- a/opensm/opensm/main.c
>>>> +++ b/opensm/opensm/main.c
>>>> @@ -187,7 +187,7 @@ static void show_usage(void)
>>>> " Sets the SL to use to communicate with the
>>>> SM/SA. Defaults to 0.\n\n");
>>>> printf("--connect_roots, -z\n"
>>>> " This option enforces routing engines (up/down
>>>> and \n"
>>>> - " fat-tree) to make connectivity between root
>>>> switches\n"
>>>> + " fat-tree) to make connectivity between all
>>>> switches\n"
>>>> " and in this way be IBA compliant. In many
>>>> cases,\n"
>>>> " this can violate \"pure\" deadlock free
>>>> algorithm, so\n"
>>>> " use it carefully.\n\n");
>>>> diff --git a/opensm/opensm/osm_ucast_updn.c
>>>> b/opensm/opensm/osm_ucast_updn.c
>>>> index 164c6f4..f44ca24 100644
>>>> --- a/opensm/opensm/osm_ucast_updn.c
>>>> +++ b/opensm/opensm/osm_ucast_updn.c
>>>> @@ -314,9 +314,7 @@ static int updn_set_min_hop_table(IN updn_t *
>>>> p_updn)
>>>> item = cl_qmap_next(item)) {
>>>> p_sw = (osm_switch_t *)item;
>>>> /* Clear Min Hop Table */
>>>> - if (p_subn->opt.connect_roots)
>>>> - updn_clear_non_root_hops(p_updn, p_sw);
>>>> - else
>>>> + if (!p_subn->opt.connect_roots)
>>>> osm_switch_clear_hops(p_sw);
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>
>>> What kind of testing was done for this?
>>> I have a strong feeling that it will break up/down.
>>> If the connect_roots option is on, you will not clear
>>> the lid matrix at all, and it will contain also the
>>> down/up routes.
>>
>> that is the idea.
>> instead of leaving only up/dpwn routes we want to keep routes between
>> all switches.
>> the routes between host nodes will still be up/down.
>
> Lid matrix might contain down/up routes between many
> kinds of switches, not only between roots. This means
> that you might have down/up paths between leaf switches,
> even though you could have found up/down path for them.
> This also means that you might end up with down/up routes
> between HCAs that are connected to these leafs.
ok I'll check this again.
Thanks,
Eli
>
> -- Yevgeny
>
>> Eli
>>
>>>
>>> -- Yevgeny
>>
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in
>> the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>>
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
