On 09:22 Tue 07 Oct , Hal Rosenstock wrote: > > > > Actually, I was thinking about something else: > > Currently we have switch LFT implemented as osm_fwd_tbl_t. > > I can remove the unnecessary complexity of the osm_fwd_tbl_t by replacing > > it with a simple uint8_t array (same as LFT buffer). Then by simple > > comparison I will check whether the recently calculated LFT > > matches the switch's LFT, and if there is a match, then lft_buf > > can be freed. In this case only the switches that have LFT different > > from the recently calculated LFT will have both tables, which would be > > rare and temporary - on the next heavy sweep the LFTs would match, and > > lft_buf would be freed. > > Can the forwarding tables be removed ? How would paths be > calculated/walked end to end on an SA PathRecord/MultiPathRecord query > ? Would that then require query of the LFTs in the switches ?
No. As far as I understand whole idea is to keep LFT images in raw buffer (as they really are) similar to lft_buf instead of osm_fwd_tbl_t. IMO this simplifies the code in general and makes described optimization possible. Sasha _______________________________________________ general mailing list general@lists.openfabrics.org http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
