Re: [PATCH] opensm/osm_state_mgr.c: force heavy sweep when fabric consists of single switch

[Yevgeny Kliteynik <kliteyn-LDSdmyG8hGV8YrgS2mwiifqBs+8SCbDb@public.gmane.org>]

Line Holen wrote:
> On 11/ 4/09 04:54 PM, Yevgeny Kliteynik wrote:
>> Line Holen wrote:
>>> On 11/ 4/09 10:47 AM, Yevgeny Kliteynik wrote:
>>>> Sasha Khapyorsky wrote:
>>>>> On 12:26 Tue 03 Nov     , Yevgeny Kliteynik wrote:
>>>>>> Always do heavy sweep when there is only one node in the
>>>>>> fabric, and this node is a switch, and SM runs on top of it -
>>>>>> there may be a race when OSM starts running before the
>>>>>> external ports are ports are up, or if they went through
>>>>>> reset while SM was starting.
>>>>>> In this race switch brings up the ports and turns on the
>>>>>> PSC bit, but OSM might get PortInfo before SwitchInfo, and it
>>>>>> might see all ports as down, but PSC bit on. If that happens,
>>>>>> OSM turns off PSC bit, and it will never see external ports
>>>>>> again - it won't perform any heavy sweep, only light sweep
>>>>> Could such race happen when there are more than one node in a fabric?
>>>> I think that my description of the race was misleading.
>>>> The race can happen on *any* fabric when SM runs on switch.
>>>> But when it does happen, SM thinks that the whole subnet
>>>> is just one switch - that's what it managed to discover.
>>>> I've actually seen it happening.
>>>> So the patch fixes this particular case.
>>>>
>>>> So the next question that you would probably ask is can
>>>> this race happen on some *other* switch and not the one
>>>> SM is running on?
>>>>
>>>> Well, I don't know. I have a hunch that it can't, but I
>>>> couldn't prove it to myself yet.
>>>>
>>>> The race on the managed switch is a special case because
>>>> SM always sees port 0, and always gets responses to its
>>>> SMP queries. On any other switch, if the ports were reset,
>>>> SM won't get any response until the ports are up again.
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps there might be a case where SM got some port as down,
>>>> and by the time SM got SwitchInfo with PSC bit the port
>>>> was already up, so SM won't start discovery beyond this
>>>> port. But this race would be fixed on the next heavy sweep,
>>>> when SM will discover this port that it missed the previous
>>>> time, whereas race on managed switch is fatal - SM won't
>>>> ever do any heavy sweep.
>>>>
>>>> -- Yevgeny
>>> At least for the 3.2 branch there is a general race regardless of
>>> where the SM is running. I haven't checked the current master, but
>>> I cannot recall seeing any patches related to this so I assume
>>> the race is still there.
>>>
>>> There is a window between SM discovering a switch and clearing PSC
>>> for the same switch. The SM will not detect a state change on the
>>> switch ports during this time.
>> If the port changes state during that period, the switch issues
>> new trap 128, which (I think) should cause SM to re-discover the
>> fabric once this discovery cycle is over. Is this correct?
>>
> 
> I think the switch shall send a trap whenever it sets the PSC bit.
> Once set I believe it will not send another trap until it is reset.
> Or do I misinterpret the spec ?

I may be wrong, but I thought that this is how things work:
 - port state changes
 - switch turns on PSC bit and starts sending traps
 - SM gets the trap, sends trap repress
 - switch gets trap repress and stops sending traps
 - PSC is still on
 - port state changes again (the same or any other port)
 - switch turns on PSC bit (which doesn't matter as PSC is
   already on) and starts sending traps again
 - etc...

Anyway, I'll double-check this issue.

-- Yevgeny
 
>> Or perhaps the more serious problem happens when SM LID is not
>> configured yet on the switch, hence the trap is not going to the
>> right place?
>>
>>> I have a patch for the 3.2 branch that I can merge into master.
>> Sure, that would be nice :)
>>
>> -- Yevgeny
>>
>>
>>> Line
>>>
>>>>> Sasha
>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Yevgeny Kliteynik <kliteyn-LDSdmyG8hGV8YrgS2mwiifqBs+8SCbDb@public.gmane.org>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>  opensm/opensm/osm_state_mgr.c |   15 ++++++++++-----
>>>>>>  1 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/opensm/opensm/osm_state_mgr.c
>>>>>> b/opensm/opensm/osm_state_mgr.c
>>>>>> index 4303d6e..537c855 100644
>>>>>> --- a/opensm/opensm/osm_state_mgr.c
>>>>>> +++ b/opensm/opensm/osm_state_mgr.c
>>>>>> @@ -1062,13 +1062,18 @@ static void do_sweep(osm_sm_t * sm)
>>>>>>       * Otherwise, this is probably our first discovery pass
>>>>>>       * or we are connected in loopback. In both cases do a
>>>>>>       * heavy sweep.
>>>>>> -     * Note: If we are connected in loopback we want a heavy
>>>>>> -     * sweep, since we will not be getting any traps if there is
>>>>>> -     * a lost connection.
>>>>>> +     * Note the following:
>>>>>> +     * 1. If we are connected in loopback we want a heavy sweep,
>>>>>> since we
>>>>>> +     *    will not be getting any traps if there is a lost
>>>>>> connection.
>>>>>> +     * 2. If we are in DISCOVERING state - this means it is either in
>>>>>> +     *    initializing or wake up from STANDBY - run the heavy sweep.
>>>>>> +     * 3. If there is only one node in the fabric, and this node is a
>>>>>> +     *    switch, and OSM runs on top of it, there might be a race
>>>>>> when
>>>>>> +     *    OSM starts running before the external ports are up -
>>>>>> run the
>>>>>> +     *    heavy sweep.
>>>>>>       */
>>>>>> -    /*  if we are in DISCOVERING state - this means it is either in
>>>>>> -     *  initializing or wake up from STANDBY - run the heavy sweep */
>>>>>>      if (cl_qmap_count(&sm->p_subn->sw_guid_tbl)
>>>>>> +        && cl_qmap_count(&sm->p_subn->node_guid_tbl) != 1
>>>>>>          && sm->p_subn->sm_state != IB_SMINFO_STATE_DISCOVERING
>>>>>>          && sm->p_subn->opt.force_heavy_sweep == FALSE
>>>>>>          && sm->p_subn->force_heavy_sweep == FALSE
>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>> 1.5.1.4
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>> 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
>>>
>> -- 
>> 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