[openib-general] Re: IB Diagnositic Tools

[Hal Rosenstock]

Hi Eitan,

On Sat, 2005-06-25 at 15:25, Eitan Zahavi wrote: 
> Following the discussion about the debug tools, I would like to
> propose using OpenSM Vendor layer as a common layer for developing the
> debug tools. 

Is the OpenSM vendor layer available in Windows for OpenIB or is this
something which needs to be developed ?

> Since this layer is already available on both Windows and Linux stacks
> it could allow us to have the same code tree for both.

Will the Linux distros take it this way (with #ifdef OS)

> Also I would like to propose developing an enhanced functionality for
> some of the tools.
> 
> Especially adding the concept of reporting using "system names" rather
> then GUIDs and LIDs.

Not sure exactly what you have in mind here but there is something like
this on the TODO list. How are GUIDs and LIDs aggregated into a name ? 
Is this SystemImageGUID ?

> The discovery tool would also be enhanced to perform some basic health
> checks for the fabric.

Sure that can be an additional option. What are the basic health checks
you want to add ?

> As we (Mellanox) already have a "MADs" and "Topology" manipulations
> layers implemented we plan to open them in the OpenIB repository as
> well as develop the enhanced debug capability in OpenIB.

Not sure what you mean exactly by MAD and topology manipulations layers.
Are there different tools ? What do they provide different from the
current OpenIB diagnostics ?

> If there is an interest in these tools we can provide an open version
> of those in week or two.

Will the development then be done in the OpenIB tree or will the drop
model be used ? On the Linux side, the community desires the tools to be
built with autotools.

-- Hal

> Eitan
> 
> Eitan Zahavi
> 
> Design Technology Director
> 
> Mellanox Technologies LTD
> 
> Tel:+972-4-9097208
> Fax:+972-4-9593245
> 
> P.O. Box 586 Yokneam 20692 ISRAEL
>