On Thu, 2007-02-22 at 03:04, Or Gerlitz wrote: > Sean Hefty wrote: > >> Note that since the HCA validates the pkey in the in coming packet, no > >> matter what the IB SW would do, partial members of a partition can't > >> talk to each other. So the approach taken by the core/ipoib code was > >> to just ignore the MSb in places where the code looks for the pkey > >> --index-- and use the full member pkey when forming MGIDs. This seems > >> fine to me. > > > My concern is that ib_find_cached_pkey() returns an index to a pkey that > > wasn't > > the one in the search. Can this lead to a QP being configured in such a > > way > > that communication with a remote QP would silently fail? > > My understanding is that when an IPoIB broadcast domain contains both > partial and full members (*) attempts to communicate between two partial > members would silently fail,
An IB multicast group _cannot_ have partial members so this never should get far enough to where two limited members would be unable to communicate. -- Hal > does this silence is something you think we > should work to change? > > (*) eg when you have bunch or clients and a server or bunch of servers > and you don't want to allow --clients-- to communicate among themselves) > > > I'm not against this patch, but I want to make sure that I understand the > > issues, so we're not creating a work-around solution. The patch is against > > the > > librdmacm, yet there's nothing that I see in the librdmacm that makes me > > think > > it's behaving incorrectly. > > My thinking is that if in the end of this thread we are willing to move > forward without changing ib_find_cached_pkey() then this patch should be > merged. > > Or. _______________________________________________ openib-general mailing list openib-general@openib.org http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general