On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 11:38 AM, Hal Rosenstock <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 10:42 AM, Sasha Khapyorsky <[email protected]> > wrote: >> On 08:46 Thu 12 Nov , Hal Rosenstock wrote: >>> > >>> > Any particular reason why there's no reporting of these traps? >>> >>> AFAIK it's been this way for at least the last 5 or 6 years. >> >> Yes, this is what I found too tracking down git/svn history. >> >>> A practical consideration in changing this is that these traps are the >>> ones for which babbling port was implemented since they do not obey >>> the trap rate so there's a large downside to adding the reports for >>> these. If that is to be done, then perhaps this should be done based >>> on some option. >> >> I don't think that we need new option for this, instead we should care >> that OpenSM is not overloaded by such trap floods. > > We've cared for several years now (babbling port policy was introduced > into the master on 7/6/09)
I meant 7/6/07 > but this issue still persists. Are you > saying no reports for these traps until the trap rate is obeyed ? > > -- Hal > >> >> Sasha >> > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
