[ofa-general] Re: [PATCH] opensm/osm_state_mgr.c: bug fix in unicast cache

[Sasha Khapyorsky]

On 00:00 Thu 20 Nov     , Yevgeny Kliteynik wrote:
> Sasha Khapyorsky wrote:
>> Hi Yevgeny,
>> On 11:51 Wed 19 Nov     , Yevgeny Kliteynik wrote:
>>> Hi Sasha,
>>>
>>> When there are errors during initialization and new
>>> heavy sweep is forced, unicast cache might hold a
>>> snapshot of the previous routing, and since there
>>> might be no *topology* changes, ucast cache will
>>> apply that cached routing, which might be wrong.
>>>
>>> This patch invalidates cache explicitly if there
>>> were initialization errors in addition to few other
>>> cases.
>>>
>>> This fix addresses bug #1398.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Yevgeny Kliteynik <kliteyn at dev.mellanox.co.il>
>>> ---
>>>  opensm/opensm/osm_state_mgr.c |   16 ++++++++++++----
>>>  1 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/opensm/opensm/osm_state_mgr.c 
>>> b/opensm/opensm/osm_state_mgr.c
>>> index 841438c..d00e8ff 100644
>>> --- a/opensm/opensm/osm_state_mgr.c
>>> +++ b/opensm/opensm/osm_state_mgr.c
>>> @@ -1064,6 +1064,18 @@ static void do_sweep(osm_sm_t * sm)
>>>  	}
>>>
>>>  	/*
>>> +	 * Unicast cache should be invalidated if:
>>> +	 *  - every sweep is a heavy sweep
>>> +	 *  - there were errors during initialization
>>> +	 *  - subnet re-route is requested
>>> +	 */
>>> +	if (sm->p_subn->opt.use_ucast_cache &&
>>> +	    (sm->p_subn->opt.force_heavy_sweep ||
>> Why 'opt.force_heavy_sweep' should be there? It is possible to enforce
>> heavy sweep without routing cache just by using:
>> opt.force_heavy_sweep TRUE
>> opt.use_ucast_cache FALSE
>
> Well, it doesn't have to be there.
> The opt.force_heavy_sweep is kind of debug mode of opensm,
> so I just wanted to disable cache in that case.
> Want me to remove it and repost the patch?

Yes, please.

Sasha