From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hal Rosenstock Subject: Re: OpenSM 3.3.16 at 100% CPU load, "console off" Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2013 12:51:47 -0400 Message-ID: <525589A3.6060001@dev.mellanox.co.il> References: <525539A4.8090700@profitbricks.com> <52555A04.8080606@dev.mellanox.co.il> <52556172.2070707@dev.mellanox.co.il> <52556BEE.5070409@profitbricks.com> <525572FE.5080805@dev.mellanox.co.il> <52557BCF.6030302@profitbricks.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <52557BCF.6030302-EIkl63zCoXaH+58JC4qpiA@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Sebastian Riemer Cc: "linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On 10/9/2013 11:52 AM, Sebastian Riemer wrote: > On 09.10.2013 17:15, Hal Rosenstock wrote: >> What does service restart do in terms of OpenSM ? >> >> Note that the console parameter is _not_ changeable "on the fly" right >> now so if OpenSM is being SIGHUP'd by service restart then this is a >> current limitation (and is clearly not detected/protected against in the >> current code base). It sounds like that may be what is going on. > > Yes, it emits SIGHUP. Thanks for the information! The opensm is a > critical component. So IMHO it needs to be fixed in a way that it either > protects itself against such changes by ignoring them on the fly or it > needs to support these changes. > > The current situation is not really acceptable and the opensm stability > is crucial. So I'll think about fixing it. > Are you interested in patches in this regard? Yes; such patches are always welcome! Thanks. -- Hal > > Cheers, > Sebastian > > > -- 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