[ofa-general] Re: [PATCH] opensm: disable switch ports only
Sasha Khapyorsky
sashak at voltaire.com
Tue Nov 18 05:29:22 PST 2008
On 08:04 Tue 18 Nov , Hal Rosenstock wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 7:53 AM, Sasha Khapyorsky <sashak at voltaire.com> wrote:
> >
> > When "babbling port" policy is on disable switch ports even when trap
> > source is endport.
>
> So does disables the peer switch port to an endport which is babbling
> ?
Yes.
> That could be made clearer in the description.
Ok.
> What happens if the end port is switch port 0 ?
When it should work as usual (it doesn't have remote port).
> > This will allow to handle disable ports remotely
> > (with ibportstate, etc.).
>
> I'm not following what you mean by the ibportstate comment here. What
> port can ibportstate now disable differently from before ?
It is the same, but when endport is disabled how could we reenable this
remotely via downed link?
Sasha
>
> -- Hal
>
> > Signed-off-by: Sasha Khapyorsky <sashak at voltaire.com>
> > ---
> > opensm/opensm/osm_trap_rcv.c | 4 ++++
> > 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/opensm/opensm/osm_trap_rcv.c b/opensm/opensm/osm_trap_rcv.c
> > index 5de283b..07c5183 100644
> > --- a/opensm/opensm/osm_trap_rcv.c
> > +++ b/opensm/opensm/osm_trap_rcv.c
> > @@ -239,6 +239,10 @@ static int disable_port(osm_sm_t *sm, osm_physp_t *p)
> > ib_port_info_t *pi = (ib_port_info_t *)payload;
> > int ret;
> >
> > + /* in case of endport - disable switch's peer port */
> > + if (osm_node_get_type(p->p_node) != IB_NODE_TYPE_SWITCH)
> > + p = p->p_remote_physp;
> > +
> > /* If trap 131, might want to disable peer port if available */
> > /* but peer port has been observed not to respond to SM requests */
> >
> > --
> > 1.6.0.3.517.g759a
> >
> >
More information about the general
mailing list