Hal Rosenstock wrote:
So solicited MAD responses cannot currently be snooped nor can
unsolicited ones for which an agent is registered (Since SMA and PMA are
currently firmware based, the latter is not an issue for the current
implementation).
I've gotten a start on adding in the snooping support.
Hal Rosenstock wrote:
I'd like to place the snooping code in as few places as possible, but
still be able to snoop locally processed MADs. Ideally a MAD should be
snooped exactly once, which requires some extra care when handling QP
errors. Snooping in the completion handling allows the MAD
Hi,
I believe there is an issue with smpdump (or gmpdump) and just want to
make sure I am not forgetting something as I am want to do :-)
Each received MAD can only have 1 client which owns it. That client is
either determined via solicited routing or version/class/method (and
soon OUI)
Hal Rosenstock wrote:
Each received MAD can only have 1 client which owns it. That client is
either determined via solicited routing or version/class/method (and
soon OUI) routing.
This is correct. This was done to avoid having to copy received MADs.
So solicited MAD responses cannot currently be
On Tue, 2004-11-30 at 13:55, Sean Hefty wrote:
This is something that was briefly discussed before. I think that I
would support snooping by extending the ib_mad_reg_reg structure to
indicate a registration type, possibly along with some additional
filtering parameters. (We could also
Hal Rosenstock wrote:
This is something that was briefly discussed before. I think that I
would support snooping by extending the ib_mad_reg_reg structure to
indicate a registration type, possibly along with some additional
filtering parameters. (We could also create a new snoop routine.)
On Tue, 2004-11-30 at 14:47, Sean Hefty wrote:
I guess filtering can be done above the MAD layer,
That seems like the right way to go to me.
so just letting the
user specify the qp_type may be all that's needed, beyond indicating
that snooping is desired. If we go this route, we can
On Tue, 2004-11-30 at 14:47, Sean Hefty wrote:
I guess filtering can be done above the MAD layer, so just letting the
user specify the qp_type may be all that's needed, beyond indicating
that snooping is desired. If we go this route, we can probably support
any number of snoopers.
Does
