[ofa-general] [PATCH] Opensm: switchbalance console option

[Sasha Khapyorsky]

On 15:37 Wed 12 Mar     , Al Chu wrote:
> Hey Sasha,
> 
> Forgot to run this through osm_indent.  Here's the cleaned up patch.
> 
> Al
> 
> On Wed, 2008-03-12 at 09:57 -0700, Al Chu wrote:
> > Hey Sasha,
> > 
> > Here's a patch that does the previously discussed switchbalance console
> > option.  Algorithmically it does pretty much the exact same thing as the
> > check_lft_balance script, but everything is faster of course b/c opensm
> > already knows everything.
> > 
> > Al
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> -- 
> Albert Chu
> chu11 at llnl.gov
> 925-422-5311
> Computer Scientist
> High Performance Systems Division
> Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

> From ffdba2635aeea1d1be58c8966f8f6137bb048dea Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Albert L. Chu <chu11 at llnl.gov>
> Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:34:49 -0700
> Subject: [PATCH] add switchbalance command to console
> 
> 
> Signed-off-by: Albert L. Chu <chu11 at llnl.gov>

Applied. Thanks. Small question is below.

[snip...]
>  
> +static void switchbalance_check(osm_opensm_t * p_osm,
> +				osm_switch_t * p_sw, FILE * out, int verbose)
> +{
> +	uint8_t port_num;
> +	uint8_t num_ports;
> +	const cl_qmap_t *p_port_tbl;
> +	osm_port_t *p_port;
> +	osm_physp_t *p_physp;
> +	osm_physp_t *p_rem_physp;
> +	osm_node_t *p_rem_node;
> +	uint32_t count[255];	/* max ports is a uint8_t */
> +	uint8_t output_ports[255];
> +	uint8_t output_ports_count = 0;
> +	uint32_t min_count = 0xFFFFFFFF;
> +	uint32_t max_count = 0;
> +	unsigned int i;
> +
> +	memset(count, '\0', sizeof(uint32_t) * 255);
> +
> +	/* Count port usage */
> +	p_port_tbl = &p_osm->subn.port_guid_tbl;
> +	for (p_port = (osm_port_t *) cl_qmap_head(p_port_tbl);
> +	     p_port != (osm_port_t *) cl_qmap_end(p_port_tbl);
> +	     p_port = (osm_port_t *) cl_qmap_next(&p_port->map_item)) {
> +		uint16_t min_lid_ho;
> +		uint16_t max_lid_ho;
> +		uint16_t lid_ho;
> +
> +		/* Don't count switches in port usage */
> +		if (osm_node_get_type(p_port->p_node) == IB_NODE_TYPE_SWITCH)
> +			continue;
> +
> +		osm_port_get_lid_range_ho(p_port, &min_lid_ho, &max_lid_ho);
> +
> +		if (min_lid_ho == 0 || max_lid_ho == 0)
> +			continue;
> +
> +		for (lid_ho = min_lid_ho; lid_ho <= max_lid_ho; lid_ho++) {
> +			port_num = osm_fwd_tbl_get(&(p_sw->fwd_tbl), lid_ho);
> +			if (port_num == OSM_NO_PATH)
> +				continue;
> +
> +			count[port_num]++;
> +		}
> +	}
> +
> +	num_ports = p_sw->num_ports;
> +	for (port_num = 1; port_num < num_ports; port_num++) {
> +		p_physp = osm_node_get_physp_ptr(p_sw->p_node, port_num);
> +
> +		/* if port is down/unhealthy, don't consider it in 
> +		 * min/max calculations
> +		 */
> +		if (!p_physp || !osm_physp_is_healthy(p_physp)
> +		    || !osm_physp_get_remote(p_physp))
> +			continue;
> +
> +		p_rem_physp = osm_physp_get_remote(p_physp);
> +		p_rem_node = osm_physp_get_node_ptr(p_rem_physp);
> +
> +		/* If we are directly connected to a CA, its not really 
> +		 * up for balancing consideration.
> +		 */
> +		if (osm_node_get_type(p_rem_node) == IB_NODE_TYPE_CA)
> +			continue;

Should this be

	if (osm_node_get_type(p_rem_node) != IB_NODE_TYPE_SWITCH)

? So routers will be not counted too?

Sasha