[ofw] RE: IPoIB patches

[Tzachi Dar]

Memory Leak on ipoib was applied on: 1643, 1644.
whql_bsod_patches.patch was applied on 1645, 1646, 
fab-ipoib-guid.patch was applied on  1647, 1648 with the 
following change:
 
In the function __recv_get_endpts we are still using the mask 
that exists in the registry.
This means that guid_mask will be used also for packets that 
are coming from the network.
The rational for this change is that IB clusters usually 
comes from one HW supplier.
As a result if the local GUID is not "well known" it is very 
likely that all other neighboring guids are not "well known" as well.
 
Thanks
Tzachi
 
 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Smith, Stan [mailto:stan.smith at intel.com]
> > Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 9:21 PM
> > To: Alex Naslednikov
> > Cc: Ishai Rabinovitz; Tzachi Dar; Leonid Keller; Fab Tillier
> > Subject: RE: IPoIB patches
> > 
> > Hello Alex,
> >   Attached is the combination of Fab's 4 patches into a 
> single patch. 
> > This patch applies to WOF2-0\trunk after 1st applying 
> Tzachi's ipoib 
> > memory leak patch.
> > 
> > cd cd gen1\branches\wof2-0\trunk\ulp
> >   <apply Tzachi's patch>
> > 
> > cd gen1\branches\wof2-0\trunk
> > patch -p0 < fab-ipoib-guid.patch
> > 
> > RC3 was built with the above two patches plus the 
> > whql_bsod_patches.patch. Not clear as to why the ipoib leak & 
> > whql_bsod never made it into the WOF2-0\ branch?
> > 
> > Please review fab-ipoib-guid.patch and commit to trunk & WOF2-0\ 
> > branch if OK.
> > 
> > OpenSM is performing much better, configures a fabric just 
> fine with 
> > reliable ping.
> > Starting/stopping OpenSM, and/or changing to OFED opensm & 
> back causes 
> > no problems.
> > XP64 still does not return ping packets from external 
> hosts; ping out 
> > from XP64 works fine?
> > 
> > Thank you,
> > 
> > Stan.
> > 
> > Smith, Stan wrote:
> > > OK, now you have the patches...
> > > BTW, can we keep this discussion of the list for now.
> > > Add others if necessary, Fab's aware of what's going on, no
> > need for
> > > now to include list.
> > > I'm being his hands and eyes on this issue - not my
> > favorite task, but
> > > necessary to make forward progress...
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Stan.
> > >
> > > Smith, Stan wrote:
> > >> Hello,
> > >>   I was able to obtain Fab's IPOIB patches. I believe 
> they are the 
> > >> original ones posted to the list.
> > >> I did not follow exactly what you and Fab were discussing
> > w.r.t. what
> > >> needed to be changed in these patches? Patch to the patch?
> > >>
> > >> I am now doing the work which Fab seems unable to 
> perform at this 
> > >> time.
> > >>
> > >> Would you please review these patches and work with me
> > (explain what
> > >> needs to be done) to get these patches into a suitable 
> state such 
> > >> that they can be committed to the WOF2-0\ branch & trunk.
> > >>
> > >> We really need to get a WinOF 2.0 RC3 published as soon as
> > possible
> > >> (ASAP). Am I correct in believing these patches are a good
> > idea to be
> > >> included in WinOF 2.0?
> > >>
> > >> Thank you,
> > >>
> > >> Stan.
> > 
> >