[openib-general] RE: [PATCH] osm_lid_mgr: handle different MTU

[Ofer Gigi]

Hi Hal,
I retested it with the fix:
__osm_lid_mgr_set_remote_pi_state_to_init(p_mgr, p_physp);

and it is OK.

Please check-in this change.

Thanks again!
Ofer

-----Original Message-----
From: Ofer Gigi 
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2006 10:02 AM
To: 'Hal Rosenstock'
Cc: OPENIB
Subject: RE: [PATCH] osm_lid_mgr: handle different MTU

Hi Hal,
Thanks a lot for your comments.
It should be as you said:
__osm_lid_mgr_set_remote_pi_state_to_init(p_mgr, p_physp);

I will retest it.

Thanks!
Ofer


-----Original Message-----
From: Hal Rosenstock [mailto:halr at voltaire.com] 
Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2006 4:36 PM
To: Ofer Gigi
Cc: OPENIB
Subject: Re: [PATCH] osm_link_mgr: handle different MTU

Hi Ofer,

On Wed, 2006-03-08 at 11:17, Ofer Gigi wrote:
> Hi Hal,
> 
> There was a bug that in case of a difference between the MTU of two
ports, only the 
> port with the higher MTU was set to down. Its remote port was written
in the DB in ACTIVE
> state although its real status was INIT. Because of that the SM didn't
try to lift the remote
> port to ACTIVE. 
> The change below fixes this issue.

Two things (one nit):

Subject is really osm_lid_mgr rather than osm_link_mgr. Also, see below:

-- Hal

> Thanks
> 
> Ofer G.
> 
> Signed-off-by:  Ofer Gigi <oferg at mellanox.co.il>
> 
> Index: osm_lid_mgr.c
> ===================================================================
> --- osm_lid_mgr.c	(revision 5628)
> +++ osm_lid_mgr.c	(working copy)
> @@ -893,6 +893,21 @@ __osm_lid_mgr_get_port_lid(
>  }
>  
>
/**********************************************************************
> + Set to INIT the remote port of the given physical port
> +
**********************************************************************/
> +static void
> +__osm_lid_mgr_set_remote_pi_state_to_init(
> +  IN osm_lid_mgr_t *       const p_mgr,
> +  IN osm_physp_t*          const p_physp)
> +{
> +  osm_physp_t *p_rem_port = osm_physp_get_remote(p_physp);
> +  CL_ASSERT(p_rem_port);
> +
> +  ib_port_info_t * p_pi = osm_physp_get_port_info_ptr( p_rem_port );
> +  ib_port_info_set_port_state( p_pi, IB_LINK_INIT );
> +}
> +
>
+/**********************************************************************
>
**********************************************************************/
>  static boolean_t
>  __osm_lid_mgr_set_physp_pi(
> @@ -1090,10 +1105,6 @@ __osm_lid_mgr_set_physp_pi(
>        send_set = TRUE;
>  
>      /*
> -      TO DO -
> -      If the subnet is being reconfigured, should we force the link
> -      to the INIT state?
> -
>        To reset the port state machine we can send PortInfo.State =
DOWN.
>        (see: 7.2.7 p161 lines:10-19.)
>      */
> @@ -1109,6 +1120,13 @@ __osm_lid_mgr_set_physp_pi(
>                   op_vls, ib_port_info_get_op_vls(p_old_pi)
>                   );
>        }
> +
> +      /* 
> +         we need to make sure the internal DB will follow the fact
the remote
> +         port is also going through "down" state into "init"...
> +      */
> +      __osm_lid_mgr_set_remote_pi_state_to_init(p_mgr, p_pi);
                                                          ^^^^^^
                                        Shouldn't this be p_physp ?

If so, I've made the change (no need for a new patch) but a need to
retest.

-- Hal

>        ib_port_info_set_port_state( p_pi, IB_LINK_DOWN );
>        if ( ib_port_info_get_port_state(p_pi) !=
>             ib_port_info_get_port_state(p_old_pi) )
> 
>