From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Jim Schutt" Subject: Re: opensm: switch incorrectly reports IB_PORT_CAP_HAS_MCAST_FDB_TOP ? Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2011 14:30:05 -0600 Message-ID: <4DB1E54D.2090105@sandia.gov> References: <4DB1C6A0.9000001@sandia.gov> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: "Weiny, Ira K." Cc: "linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org Weiny, Ira K. wrote: > On Apr 22, 2011, at 11:19 AM, Jim Schutt wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I've been testing the current opensm development head >> (commit 83b67527d16 from git://git.openfabrics.org/~alexnetes/opensm), >> and I've been getting some messages that are new since version 3.3.7: >> >> Apr 22 12:08:09 646534 [411CD940] 0x01 -> log_rcv_cb_error: ERR 3111: Received MAD with error status = 0x1C >> SubnGetResp(SwitchInfo), attr_mod 0x0, TID 0x4802 >> Initial path: 0,1,1,4 Return path: 0,20,1,7 >> >> I get one of these messages for each switch in my fabric, on every >> heavy sweep. >> >> It appears these are caused by my switches incorrectly reporting >> the capability IB_PORT_CAP_HAS_MCAST_FDB_TOP; i.e. this patch stops >> the messages: >> >> diff --git a/opensm/osm_mcast_mgr.c b/opensm/osm_mcast_mgr.c >> index ea52bfe..63d2968 100644 >> --- a/opensm/osm_mcast_mgr.c >> +++ b/opensm/osm_mcast_mgr.c >> @@ -1041,7 +1041,7 @@ static void mcast_mgr_set_mfttop(IN osm_sm_t * sm, IN osm_switch_t * p_sw) >> p_path = osm_physp_get_dr_path_ptr(p_physp); >> p_tbl = osm_switch_get_mcast_tbl_ptr(p_sw); >> >> - if (p_physp->port_info.capability_mask & IB_PORT_CAP_HAS_MCAST_FDB_TOP) { >> + if (0 && p_physp->port_info.capability_mask & IB_PORT_CAP_HAS_MCAST_FDB_TOP) { >> /* >> Set the top of the multicast forwarding table. >> */ >> >> IB_PORT_CAP_HAS_MCAST_FDB_TOP is bit 30 of the port capability mask, >> which in at least IBA v1.2.1 was a reserved bit but apparently is >> not anymore. > > Yes these have been published as errata to the 1.2.1 specification. > > smpquery portinfo > > should show you if it is reporting that field. Also what does > > smpquery switchinfo > > say? # smpquery --version smpquery BUILD VERSION: 1.5.8_f0526f4 Build date: Apr 22 2011 12:36:58 # smpquery -G switchinfo 0x21283a87200040 # Switch info: Lid 3 LinearFdbCap:....................49152 RandomFdbCap:....................0 McastFdbCap:.....................4096 LinearFdbTop:....................105 DefPort:.........................0 DefMcastPrimPort:................255 DefMcastNotPrimPort:.............255 LifeTime:........................18 StateChange:.....................0 OptSLtoVLMapping:................1 LidsPerPort:.....................0 PartEnforceCap:..................32 InboundPartEnf:..................1 OutboundPartEnf:.................1 FilterRawInbound:................1 FilterRawOutbound:...............1 EnhancedPort0:...................0 MulticastFDBTop:.................0x0000 # smpquery portinfo 3 # Port info: Lid 3 port 0 Mkey:............................0x0000000000000000 GidPrefix:.......................0xfe80000000000000 Lid:.............................3 SMLid:...........................48 CapMask:.........................0x42500848 IsTrapSupported IsSLMappingSupported IsSystemImageGUIDsupported IsVendorClassSupported IsCapabilityMaskNoticeSupported IsClientRegistrationSupported IsMulticastFDBTopSupported DiagCode:........................0x0000 MkeyLeasePeriod:.................0 LocalPort:.......................20 LinkWidthEnabled:................1X or 4X LinkWidthSupported:..............1X or 4X LinkWidthActive:.................4X LinkSpeedSupported:..............2.5 Gbps or 5.0 Gbps or 10.0 Gbps LinkState:.......................Active PhysLinkState:...................LinkUp LinkDownDefState:................Polling ProtectBits:.....................0 LMC:.............................0 LinkSpeedActive:.................10.0 Gbps LinkSpeedEnabled:................2.5 Gbps or 5.0 Gbps or 10.0 Gbps NeighborMTU:.....................4096 SMSL:............................0 VLCap:...........................VL0-3 InitType:........................0x00 VLHighLimit:.....................0 VLArbHighCap:....................0 VLArbLowCap:.....................0 InitReply:.......................0x00 MtuCap:..........................4096 VLStallCount:....................0 HoqLife:.........................0 OperVLs:.........................VL0-3 PartEnforceInb:..................0 PartEnforceOutb:.................0 FilterRawInb:....................0 FilterRawOutb:...................0 MkeyViolations:..................0 PkeyViolations:..................0 QkeyViolations:..................0 GuidCap:.........................1 ClientReregister:................0 McastPkeyTrapSuppressionEnabled:.0 SubnetTimeout:...................18 RespTimeVal:.....................19 LocalPhysErr:....................0 OverrunErr:......................0 MaxCreditHint:...................0 RoundTrip:.......................0 -- Jim > > Ira > >> Should I file a bug report with my switch vendor about setting >> a port capability bit for a capability they don't support, or >> is there something else going on that I haven't figured out yet? >> >> FWIW I think my switches have a base SP0; maybe it's got something >> to do with that? >> >> Thanks -- Jim >> >> -- >> 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