[ewg] Re: [ofa-general] Build failures on current 1.4.1 dailies

[Gennadiy Nerubayev]

On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 2:10 AM, Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz at voltaire.com> wrote:

> Gennadiy Nerubayev wrote:
>
>> Well, I need a recent-ish vanilla kernel due to some performance
>> advantages over stock redhat in some usage scenarios. OFED goes on top of
>> that because of the ease of installation and use.I know I can install and
>> use some of the userspace ofed stuff (opensm, utils, management, libs, etc)
>> along with the in-kernel infinband stack on 2.6.29.1, but even that does not
>> include the whole picture compared to full ofed. Simple stuff still needs to
>> be added for it to be functional, such as 90-ib.rules which is part of the
>> ofa_kernel rpm package; but I digress.
>>
> You mentioned redhat, so you could use the IB stack provided by the distro
> and just replace the kernel. This IB stack has all the components you have
> mentioned.
>

Upgrading the kernel would break ofa_kernel functionality though, so core
components would no longer work. Which is why I'd need to use the stack
inside the kernel, then use the userspace from ofed. Somewhat unrelated, but
the other component that I need is latest scst/ib_srpt, which does not yet
build very nicely against ofa_kernel.

 Also, this may sound dumb, but where do I get the support for SDP with
> in-kernel stack? I can build the libsdp stuff in ofed, but the actual module
> appears to be ofa_kernel only?
>
sdp was never submitted upstream... do you use it?


Doh. I don't currently use it, but I'll need it relatively soon for a
particular application. I can see that I can build rdma/nfs in vanilla
kernel which takes care of the build failure that I mentioned earlier.
However, without sdp in upstream it's going to be a choice of either older
kernel with ofa_kernel and sdp but no ib_srpt from scst, or newer kernel
with ib_srpt from scst but no sdp. I know that there's some progress on scst
portion to get ib_srpt to compile properly against current ofa_kernel, but
having the alternate option of sdp in upstream would be great as well... is
there a particular reason why it wasn't submitted?

In any case, I'd love to have my cake and eat it too :p

-Gennadiy
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openfabrics.org/pipermail/ewg/attachments/20090510/70c7d050/attachment.html>