On Fri, 2005-09-09 at 13:29, Eitan Zahavi wrote: > Hal Rosenstock wrote: > > Hi, > > > > A couple of things about osmtest (and one is related to OpenSM): > > > > 1. It appears that osmt_service.c sets ServiceRecords with the subnet > > prefix of the ServiceGID set to 0 ? Is that the correct thing to do > > (from an osmtest perspective) ? > > > > ServiceGID..............0x0000000000000000 > > : 0x0008f10403960559 > Well, I could not find where the spec require the validation of the provided > GID field for > ServiceRecords. The fact we allow non valid or unknown GIDs to be registered > might become useful.
I may be wrong but: ServiceGID says port GID for service. A port GID must meet the requirements in the addressing section. > > More importantly, should the SM allow this (is this a valid GID) ? > > Shouldn't it match one of the GIDs for that port that is setting the > > ServiceRecord ? > As I said - I did not see anywhere in the spec a specific requirement for > that. > Why do you see this as an issue? See above. > > 2. In general in osmtest (and other SA client code using the vendor > > layer), when a remote error is indicated (MAD status != success), this > > is indicated as a remote error. It appears that the various > > clients/applications (osmtest is one) is not dealing with BUSY which can > > be returned by an SM. > This is a big hole! Thanks for bringing it up. I think we should enhance the > SA client code to recognize this and re-issue the MAD. Can this be done in the > lowest possible layer? For busy, it might be possible but is there one timeout retry strategy or should this be left to the client ? For other errors, I think it needs to be left to the client/application to determine whether it is in error. -- Hal _______________________________________________ openib-general mailing list [email protected] http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
