[ofa-general] [PATCH 0/6] opensm: Unicast Routing Cache

[Sasha Khapyorsky]

Hi Yevgeny,

On 01:09 Tue 07 Oct     , Yevgeny Kliteynik wrote:
>
> Actually, I was thinking about something else:
> Currently we have switch LFT implemented as osm_fwd_tbl_t.
> I can remove the unnecessary complexity of the osm_fwd_tbl_t by replacing
> it with a simple uint8_t array (same as LFT buffer). Then by simple
> comparison I will check whether the recently calculated LFT
> matches the switch's LFT, and if there is a match, then lft_buf
> can be freed. In this case only the switches that have LFT different
> from the recently calculated LFT will have both tables, which would be
> rare and temporary - on the next heavy sweep the LFTs would match, and
> lft_buf would be freed.
> Effectively, it won't have memory penalty.
> It can be done in a separate patch.

Agree about separate patch. And would be really nice to have it in OFED
1.4 days.

>> Are you sure all the memory allocation failures are handled properly
>> within the routing cache code ? What I mean is that NULL is returned
>> and does this always result in a caching not used/routing recalculated
>> ? Also, in that case, should some log message be indicated rather than
>> hiding this ?
>
> I will check it.

I think Hal is about non-checked malloc() in __cache_add_port() function.

>> Nit: doc/current-routing.txt should also be updated for this feature.
>
> OK, separate patch.

Agree, it is needed too.

Sasha