[openib-general] [RFC] ib_mad

[Hal Rosenstock]

On Thu, 2004-09-16 at 23:09, Roland Dreier wrote:
> I don't think that answered my question.  However the existence of a
> System Image GUID change trap and the nonexistence of a "number of
> ports change" trap seems to imply nodes changing their number of ports
> is not well supported.  

The same is true for a number of components which can change but there 
are no associated traps. This makes it harder for the SM to deal
with these changes (polling rather than trap based).

> For example what's going to happen if a SM
> discovers an 8 port switch, which then turns into a 12 port switch and
> sends a trap for port 10 before the SM sweeps again?
> 
> Since no devices that I know of will change their number of ports, I
> don't think we should worry about it now.

Since switch and CA chips themselves don't change their number of ports,
there is only one case of this: a box made up of a group of switch chips
which was reporting itself as one switch in terms of IBA.

I agree that we shouldn't worry about this case now.

-- Hal