[PATCH] opensm: Special Case the IPv6 Solicited Node Multicast address to use a single Mcast (WAS: Re: [ofa-general] IPoIB, OFED 1.2.5, and multicast groups.)
Sasha Khapyorsky
sashak at voltaire.com
Tue Jan 15 11:33:47 PST 2008
On 11:17 Tue 15 Jan , Hal Rosenstock wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 19:20 +0000, Sasha Khapyorsky wrote:
> > On 09:37 Tue 15 Jan , Hal Rosenstock wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 08:47 -0800, Ira Weiny wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 17:40:33 -0800
> > > > Hal Rosenstock <hrosenstock at xsigo.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 01:43 +0000, Sasha Khapyorsky wrote:
> > > > > > On 17:22 Mon 14 Jan , Hal Rosenstock wrote:
> > > > > > > On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 00:50 +0000, Sasha Khapyorsky wrote:
> > > > > > > > On 16:05 Mon 14 Jan , Hal Rosenstock wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On Mon, 2008-01-14 at 15:35 -0800, Ira Weiny wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 12:23:34 -0800
> > > > > > > > > > Hal Rosenstock <hrosenstock at xsigo.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 2008-01-14 at 10:51 -0800, Ira Weiny wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > Hey Hal, thanks for the response. Comments below.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 12:57:45 -0500
> > > > > > > > > > > > "Hal Rosenstock" <hal.rosenstock at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > <snip>
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Didn't you just change that in that many MGIDs go to one MLID ?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Ah, this is where the confusion has been. No, this is _not_ what I did... I
> > > > > > > > > > see now; that is what was proposed in the thread a year ago, however, I don't
> > > > > > > > > > think mapping many MGIDs to 1 MLID will work well.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Why not ?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > It appears to be what you did (multiple MGIDs are mapped onto MLID (in
> > > > > > > > > the case below 0xc002)). Am I mistaken ?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > As far as I understand this patch it is the different. Here multiple
> > > > > > > > ports which match ipv6 solicited node multicast address will try to
> > > > > > > > join a single MC group (with single MGID and unique MLID).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I don't think you are using the IBA defined terminology.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > A MC group is an MGID in terms of the IBA spec. Also, the SA GetTable
> > > > > > > with MGIDs wildcarded shows all the MGIDs. (Does it show that "special"
> > > > > > > MGID ?)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Yes, it has MLID 0xc002 in Ira's 'saquery -g' example.
> > > > >
> > > > > No, MLID is not the group (at least in IBA terms); I was referring to
> > > > > the base SNM MGID (with partition and low 24 bits masked off).
> > > >
> > > > You are right the MLID is not the group. But the patch only creates 1 MGID as
> > > > well.
> > >
> > > I think you are confusing internal implementation with the outside view
> > > of what is going on.
> > >
> > > > I think I see where you are coming from but...
> > > >
> > > > Let me ask this. (I think I know the answer but I will ask anyway.) If you
> > > > have 3 MGID's (0xFF...1, 0xFF...2, 0xFF...3, 3 actual mgrp structures in
> > > > opensm) and you map them all to MLID 0xC001 will a message to 0xC001 reach all
> > > > 3 nodes?
> > >
> > > Ignoring the partitioning (and assuming the rates and MTUs are all the
> > > same), then yes.
> > >
> > > Let me ask you this:
> > > Do all IPv6 SNM MGIDs show up when you do SA GetTable for groups ?
> >
> > Let me answer. No. Only first MGID will be shown.
> >
> > I guess it is wrong in terms of IBTA,
>
> Yup; all those MGIDs need to be able to be queried.
>
> > but since whole feature is optional
> > I don't think it is a disaster (rather known limitation), and ipv6 not
> > working with big clusters is.
>
> Yes, but IMO we can/should do better than this.
Nobody said anything against it.
> It's not much more work,
> is it ?
I guess it is more work, don't know for sure yet.
Sasha
>
> -- Hal
>
> > Sasha
> >
> > >
> > > > > > > I would phrase this differently:
> > > > > > > All IPv6 SNM groups are mapped to a single MLID (when this feature is
> > > > > > > enabled).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > No, all ports join single IPv6 SNM MC group, and yes, it has single MGID
> > > > > > (and single MLID).
> > > > >
> > > > > It does not have a single MGID; it has many MGIDs including the base one
> > > > > (just look at the group dump).
> > > >
> > > > Are you mainly objecting to the fact that the IPoIB client nodes request
> > > > joining of MGID 0xFF...X and we are joining them to 0xFF...Y?
> > >
> > > No; my concerns are:
> > > 1. Your's and Sasha's categorization is wrong in that many MGIDs are
> > > mapped to a single MLID (it is MLID overloading which is allowed by the
> > > IBA spec)
> > > 2. I think that the rate and MTU issue will rear it's ugly head just
> > > like has occurred and still occurs for the IP broadcast group but this
> > > one is even more subtle
> > > 3. It is a spec violation in terms of the current (and previous versions
> > > of the) IBA spec.
> > >
> > > -- Hal
> > >
> > > > Ira
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > -- Hal
> > > > >
> > > > > > Sasha
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > It so happens that OpenSM internally does the accounting on
> > > > > > > membership by treating them all as members of the same "base" or
> > > > > > > "masked" group by masking off partition and the low 24 bits (port GUID).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > -- Hal
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Sasha
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > What I did was to allow the first IPv6 request to create the group and then all
> > > > > > > > > > other requests were added to this group.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > You are using the word group loosely here and that is the source of the
> > > > > > > > > confusion IMO. I think by group you mean MLID.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > This sends all the neighbor discovery messages to all nodes on the network.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > All nodes part of that MLID tree.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > This might seem inefficient but should work. (... and seems to.)
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Sure; the hosts will filter based on MGID. The tradeoff is MLID
> > > > > > > > > utilization versus fabric utilization.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > All of the requests for this type of MGRP join are routed to
> > > > > > > > > > > > one group. Therefore, I thought the same rules for deleting the group would
> > > > > > > > > > > > apply; when all the members are gone it is removed?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Yes, the group may go but not the underlying MLID as there are other
> > > > > > > > > > > groups which are sharing this. That's not what happens now.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > No, since there is only 1 group in this implementation it should work like
> > > > > > > > > > others. The first node of this "mgid type" will create the group. Others will
> > > > > > > > > > join it and will continue to use it even if the creator leaves.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Are you saying all these groups appear as 1 "group" to OpenSM (as the
> > > > > > > > > real groups are masked to the same value) ?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > -- Hal
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Does this make more sense?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Ira
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Just to be clear, after
> > > > > > > > > > > > this patch the mgroups are:
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > 09:36:40 > saquery -g
> > > > > > > > > > > > MCMemberRecord group dump:
> > > > > > > > > > > > MGID....................0xff12401bffff0000 : 0x00000000ffffffff
> > > > > > > > > > > > Mlid....................0xC000
> > > > > > > > > > > > Mtu.....................0x84
> > > > > > > > > > > > pkey....................0xFFFF
> > > > > > > > > > > > Rate....................0x83
> > > > > > > > > > > > MCMemberRecord group dump:
> > > > > > > > > > > > MGID....................0xff12401bffff0000 : 0x0000000000000001
> > > > > > > > > > > > Mlid....................0xC001
> > > > > > > > > > > > Mtu.....................0x84
> > > > > > > > > > > > pkey....................0xFFFF
> > > > > > > > > > > > Rate....................0x83
> > > > > > > > > > > > MCMemberRecord group dump:
> > > > > > > > > > > > MGID....................0xff12601bffff0000 : 0x00000001ff0021e9
> > > > > > > > > > > > Mlid....................0xC002
> > > > > > > > > > > > Mtu.....................0x84
> > > > > > > > > > > > pkey....................0xFFFF
> > > > > > > > > > > > Rate....................0x83
> > > > > > > > > > > > MCMemberRecord group dump:
> > > > > > > > > > > > MGID....................0xff12601bffff0000 : 0x0000000000000001
> > > > > > > > > > > > Mlid....................0xC003
> > > > > > > > > > > > Mtu.....................0x84
> > > > > > > > > > > > pkey....................0xFFFF
> > > > > > > > > > > > Rate....................0x83
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > All of these requests are added to the
> > > > > > > > > > > > MGID....................0xff12601bffff0000 : 0x00000001ff0021e9
> > > > > > > > > > > > Mlid....................0xC002
> > > > > > > > > > > > group. But as you say, how do we determine that the pkey, mtu, and rate are
> > > > > > > > > > > > valid? :-/
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > But here is a question:
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > What happens if someone with an incorrect MTU tries to join the
> > > > > > > > > > > > MGID....................0xff12401bffff0000 : 0x0000000000000001
> > > > > > > > > > > > group? Wouldn't this code return this mgrp pointer and the subsequent MTU and
> > > > > > > > > > > > rate checks fail? I seem to recall a thread discussing this before. I don't
> > > > > > > > > > > > remember what the outcome was. I seem to remember the question was if OpenSM
> > > > > > > > > > > > should create/modify a group to the "lowest common" MTU/Rate, and succeed all
> > > > > > > > > > > > the joins, vs enforcing the faster MTU/Rate and failing the joins.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Yes, the join would fail, but I don't think that's what we would want.
> > > > > > > > > > > The alternative with the patch is to make it the lowest rate but there
> > > > > > > > > > > is a minimum MTU which might not be right.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > I think this is a policy and rather than this always being the case,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > there should be a policy parameter added to OpenSM for this. IMO
> > > > > > > > > > > > > default should be to not do this.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, for sure there needs to be some options to control the behavior.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Maybe more later...
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks again,
> > > > > > > > > > > > Ira
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > -- Hal
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ira
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > [*] Again I apologize for the spam but we were in a bit of a panic as we only
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > have the big system for the weekend and IB was not part of the test... ;-)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >From 35e35a9534bd49147886ac93ab1601acadcdbe26 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Ira K. Weiny <weiny2 at llnl.gov>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2008 22:58:19 -0800
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: [PATCH] Special Case the IPv6 Solicited Node Multicast address to use a single Mcast
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Group.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: root <weiny2 at llnl.gov>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > opensm/opensm/osm_sa_mcmember_record.c | 30 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > opensm/opensm/osm_sa_path_record.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2 files changed, 59 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/opensm/opensm/osm_sa_mcmember_record.c b/opensm/opensm/osm_sa_mcmember_record.c
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > index 8eb97ad..6bcc124 100644
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- a/opensm/opensm/osm_sa_mcmember_record.c
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > +++ b/opensm/opensm/osm_sa_mcmember_record.c
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > @@ -124,9 +124,37 @@ __search_mgrp_by_mgid(IN cl_map_item_t * const p_map_item, IN void *context)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > /* compare entire MGID so different scope will not sneak in for
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > the same MGID */
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > if (memcmp(&p_mgrp->mcmember_rec.mgid,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > - &p_recvd_mcmember_rec->mgid, sizeof(ib_gid_t)))
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > + &p_recvd_mcmember_rec->mgid, sizeof(ib_gid_t))) {
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > + /* Special Case IPV6 Multicast Loopback addresses */
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > + /* 0xff12601bffff0000 : 0x00000001ffXXXXXX */
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > +#define SPEC_PREFIX (0xff12601bffff0000)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > +#define INT_ID_MASK (0x00000001ff000000)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > + uint64_t g_prefix = cl_ntoh64(p_mgrp->mcmember_rec.mgid.unicast.prefix);
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > + uint64_t g_interface_id = cl_ntoh64(p_mgrp->mcmember_rec.mgid.unicast.interface_id);
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > + uint64_t rcv_prefix = cl_ntoh64(p_recvd_mcmember_rec->mgid.unicast.prefix);
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > + uint64_t rcv_interface_id = cl_ntoh64(p_recvd_mcmember_rec->mgid.unicast.interface_id);
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > + if (rcv_prefix == SPEC_PREFIX
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > + &&
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > + (rcv_interface_id & INT_ID_MASK) == INT_ID_MASK) {
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > + if ((g_prefix == rcv_prefix)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > + &&
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > + (g_interface_id & INT_ID_MASK) ==
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > + (rcv_interface_id & INT_ID_MASK)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > + ) {
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > + osm_log(sa->p_log, OSM_LOG_INFO,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > + "Special Case Mcast Join for MGID "
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > + " MGID 0x%016"PRIx64" : 0x%016"PRIx64"\n",
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > + rcv_prefix, rcv_interface_id);
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > + goto match;
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > + }
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > + }
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > return;
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > + }
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > +match:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > if (p_ctxt->p_mgrp) {
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > osm_log(sa->p_log, OSM_LOG_ERROR,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > "__search_mgrp_by_mgid: ERR 1B03: "
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/opensm/opensm/osm_sa_path_record.c b/opensm/opensm/osm_sa_path_record.c
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > index 749a936..469773a 100644
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- a/opensm/opensm/osm_sa_path_record.c
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > +++ b/opensm/opensm/osm_sa_path_record.c
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > @@ -1536,8 +1536,37 @@ __search_mgrp_by_mgid(IN cl_map_item_t * const p_map_item, IN void *context)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > /* compare entire MGID so different scope will not sneak in for
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > the same MGID */
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > - if (memcmp(&p_mgrp->mcmember_rec.mgid, p_recvd_mgid, sizeof(ib_gid_t)))
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > + if (memcmp(&p_mgrp->mcmember_rec.mgid, p_recvd_mgid, sizeof(ib_gid_t))) {
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > + /* Special Case IPV6 Multicast Loopback addresses */
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > + /* 0xff12601bffff0000 : 0x00000001ffXXXXXX */
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > +#define SPEC_PREFIX (0xff12601bffff0000)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > +#define INT_ID_MASK (0x00000001ff000000)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > + uint64_t g_prefix = cl_ntoh64(p_mgrp->mcmember_rec.mgid.unicast.prefix);
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > + uint64_t g_interface_id = cl_ntoh64(p_mgrp->mcmember_rec.mgid.unicast.interface_id);
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > + uint64_t rcv_prefix = cl_ntoh64(p_recvd_mgid->unicast.prefix);
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > + uint64_t rcv_interface_id = cl_ntoh64(p_recvd_mgid->unicast.interface_id);
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > + if (rcv_prefix == SPEC_PREFIX
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > + &&
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > + (rcv_interface_id & INT_ID_MASK) == INT_ID_MASK) {
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > + if ((g_prefix == rcv_prefix)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > + &&
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > + (g_interface_id & INT_ID_MASK) ==
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > + (rcv_interface_id & INT_ID_MASK)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > + ) {
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > + osm_log(sa->p_log, OSM_LOG_INFO,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > + "Special Case Mcast Join for MGID "
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > + " MGID 0x%016"PRIx64" : 0x%016"PRIx64"\n",
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > + rcv_prefix, rcv_interface_id);
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > + goto match;
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > + }
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > + }
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > return;
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > + }
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > +match:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > #if 0
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > for (i = 0;
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1.5.1
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 22:04:56 -0800
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ira Weiny <weiny2 at llnl.gov> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ok,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I found my own answer. Sorry for the spam.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://lists.openfabrics.org/pipermail/general/2006-November/029617.html
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sorry,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ira
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 19:36:57 -0800
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ira Weiny <weiny2 at llnl.gov> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't really understand the innerworkings of IPoIB so forgive me if this is a
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > really stupid question but:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is it a bug that there is a Multicast group created for every node in our
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > clusters?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If not a bug why is this done? We just tried to boot on a 1151 node cluster
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and opensm is complaining there are not enough multicast groups.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jan 11 18:30:42 728984 [40C05960] -> __get_new_mlid: ERR 1B23: All available:1024 mlids are taken
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jan 11 18:30:42 729050 [40C05960] -> osm_mcmr_rcv_create_new_mgrp: ERR 1B19: __get_new_mlid failed
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jan 11 18:30:42 730647 [40401960] -> __get_new_mlid: ERR 1B23: All available:1024 mlids are taken
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jan 11 18:30:42 730691 [40401960] -> osm_mcmr_rcv_create_new_mgrp: ERR 1B19: __get_new_mlid failed
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here is the output from my small test cluster: (ibnodesinmcast uses saquery a
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > couple of times to print this nice report.)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 19:17:24 > whatsup
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > up: 9: wopr[0-7],wopri
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > down: 0:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > root at wopri:/tftpboot/images
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 19:25:03 > ibnodesinmcast -g
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 0xC000 (0xff12401bffff0000 : 0x00000000ffffffff)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In 9: wopr[0-7],wopri
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Out 0: 0
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 0xC001 (0xff12401bffff0000 : 0x0000000000000001)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In 9: wopr[0-7],wopri
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Out 0: 0
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 0xC002 (0xff12601bffff0000 : 0x00000001ff2265ed)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In 1: wopr3
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Out 8: wopr[0-2,4-7],wopri
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 0xC003 (0xff12601bffff0000 : 0x0000000000000001)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In 9: wopr[0-7],wopri
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Out 0: 0
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 0xC004 (0xff12601bffff0000 : 0x00000001ff222729)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In 1: wopr4
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Out 8: wopr[0-3,5-7],wopri
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 0xC005 (0xff12601bffff0000 : 0x00000001ff219e65)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In 1: wopri
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Out 8: wopr[0-7]
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 0xC006 (0xff12601bffff0000 : 0x00000001ff00232d)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In 1: wopr6
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Out 8: wopr[0-5,7],wopri
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 0xC007 (0xff12601bffff0000 : 0x00000001ff002325)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In 1: wopr7
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Out 8: wopr[0-6],wopri
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 0xC008 (0xff12601bffff0000 : 0x00000001ff228d35)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In 1: wopr1
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Out 8: wopr[0,2-7],wopri
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 0xC009 (0xff12601bffff0000 : 0x00000001ff2227f1)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In 1: wopr2
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Out 8: wopr[0-1,3-7],wopri
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 0xC00A (0xff12601bffff0000 : 0x00000001ff219ef1)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In 1: wopr0
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Out 8: wopr[1-7],wopri
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 0xC00B (0xff12601bffff0000 : 0x00000001ff0021e9)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In 1: wopr5
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Out 8: wopr[0-4,6-7],wopri
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Each of these MGIDS of the prefix (0xff12601bffff0000) have just one node in
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > them and represent an ipv6 address. Could you turn off ipv6 with the latest
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > IPoIB?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In a bind,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ira
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > general mailing list
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > general at lists.openfabrics.org
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > general mailing list
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > general at lists.openfabrics.org
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > > > > general mailing list
> > > > > > > > > > > > general at lists.openfabrics.org
> > > > > > > > > > > > http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
> > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > general mailing list
> > > > > > > > > general at lists.openfabrics.org
> > > > > > > > > http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > general mailing list
> > > > > > general at lists.openfabrics.org
> > > > > > http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general
> > > > > >
> > > > > > To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > general mailing list
> > > > > general at lists.openfabrics.org
> > > > > http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general
> > > > >
> > > > > To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
> > _______________________________________________
> > general mailing list
> > general at lists.openfabrics.org
> > http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general
> >
> > To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
More information about the general
mailing list