[openib-general] Re: dapl_ep_connect problems

[Aniruddha Bohra]

I just got it --
I will try it rightaway.

Thanks
Aniruddha

Hal Rosenstock wrote:

>On Mon, 2005-09-12 at 13:58, James Lentini wrote:
>  
>
>>On Mon, 12 Sep 2005, Aniruddha Bohra wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Hi
>>>   I checked the code and it seems there was indeed a problem with that.
>>>I changed the code and now it posts the connect request and does not
>>>get any event. The ep_status is DAT_EP_STATE_CONNECT_PENDING.
>>>I am trying now with dapltest to see if it is a problem with my server
>>>(netapp filer NFSoRDMA) or the Open IB stack.
>>>
>>>Thanks for your help. If you have any idea about some special 
>>>configuration required for the connection, I would really appreciate 
>>>your help. Is there any way to see the requests similar to tcpdump?
>>>      
>>>
>>I believe you've run into an ATS issue. The ATS implementations in 
>>OnTap and OpenIB were done before the ATS specification was drafted in 
>>the DAT Collaborative.
>>
>>The interoperability problem stems from the fact that OnTap ATS 
>>records and OpenIB ATS records use a different default value for the 
>>PKey field. When the issue was discussed in the DAT Collaborative, it 
>>was decided that the "default PKey value", 0xFF, should be the default 
>>    
>>
>                                             ^^^^
>                                             0xFFFF
>
>  
>
>>for this field. This is what OpenIB is using. Your version of OnTap 
>>needs an update for this.
>>
>>The quick fix is to modify OpenIB to use a default value of 0:
>>
>>
>>Index: core/at.c
>>===================================================================
>>--- core/at.c	(revision 3375)
>>+++ core/at.c	(working copy)
>>@@ -95,6 +95,9 @@ static void build_ats_req(struct ib_sa_s
>> {
>> 	struct ib_sa_ats_rec *ats;
>> 
>>+	/* FIXME Filer interop change */
>>+	pkey = 0;
>>+
>> 	memset(rec, 0, sizeof *rec);
>> 
>> 	rec->id = IB_ATS_SERVICE_ID;
>>
>>
>>The long term solution will be to give you an updated version of OnTap 
>>that uses the new default value. Let's work directly with one 
>>another on that since it is not an OpenIB issue.
>>    
>>
>
>Did you try this change ?
>
>-- Hal
>
>  
>