From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Yevgeny Kliteynik Subject: Re: opensm: suggestion to define new common port_groups file Date: Wed, 03 Feb 2010 11:59:53 +0200 Message-ID: <4B694919.1000207@dev.mellanox.co.il> References: <4B69453E.4080701@gmail.com> Reply-To: kliteyn-LDSdmyG8hGV8YrgS2mwiifqBs+8SCbDb@public.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4B69453E.4080701-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: "Eli Dorfman (Voltaire)" Cc: Sasha Khapyorsky , Jason Gunthorpe , linux-rdma , Hal Rosenstock List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On 03/Feb/10 11:43, Eli Dorfman (Voltaire) wrote: > Currently there is a duplication of port group definition in OpenSM configuration files. > Using a single configuration file for port groups will make it easier to manage and will allow using group name as keyword in other configuration files (i.e. partitions.conf, qos-policy.conf and opensm.conf) > > The suggested format for port-groups.conf is a simple list: > GroupA: GUID1, GUID2, GUID3 > GroupB: GUID4, GUID5, GUID6 > > All configuration files shall still support the old format (of specifying GUIDs explicitly) and will also recognize the new Groups. I'm all for it! > Following an example of partitions.conf file with new group definition: > management=0x7fff,ipoib,defmember=full: GroupA=full, GroupB=limited, ALL_CAS=limited; > > and qos-policy.conf with the new group definition: > > port-groups > port-group > port-guid: GroupA, GroupB > name: my.group > end-port-group > end-port-groups Perhaps in qos-policy.conf we should be able to reference GroupA and GroupB directly by its name, w/o the need to create additional group like it is shown in the example. Ideally, port-groups.conf parser should be able to understand various keywords, such as what is used in partitions.conf (ALL, SWITCHES, SELF, etc). To complicate port-groups.conf parser a bit more, it would be nice if it could support nested definition of port groups. But no need to do it right away, we can start with something simple. -- Yevgeny > > Thanks, > Eli > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in > the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html