On 9/27/19 10:18 AM, Honggang LI wrote:
On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 08:10:48AM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
On 9/22/19 8:33 PM, Honggang LI wrote:
On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 09:18:49AM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
On 9/18/19 8:50 PM, Honggang LI wrote:
The maximum initiator to target iu length can be get from the subnet
^^^
retrieved? obtained?
OK, will replace it with 'retrieved'.
manager, such as opensm and opafm. We should calculate the
^^^^^^^
Are you sure that information comes from the subnet manager?
Isn't the LID passed to get_ioc_prof() in the srp_daemon the LID of the SRP
target?
Yes, you are right. But srp_daemon/get_ioc_prof() send MAD packet
to subnet manager to obtain the maximum initiator to target iu length.
I do not agree that the maximum initiator to target IU length comes from
the subnet manager. This is how I think the srp_daemon works:
1. The srp_daemon process sends a query to the subnet manager and asks
the subnet manager to report all IB ports that support device
management.
2. The subnet manager sends back information about all ports that
support device management (struct srp_sa_port_info_rec).
3. The srp_daemon sends a query to the SRP target(s) to retrieve the
IOUnitInfo (struct srp_dm_iou_info) and IOControllerProfile
(struct srp_dm_ioc_prof). The maximum initiator to target IU length
is present in that data structure (srp_dm_ioc_prof.send_size).
Yes, your description is more accurate.
[1] "The maximum initiator to target iu length can be retrieved from the subnet
manager, such as opensm and opafm."
[2] "The maximum initiator to target iu length can be obtained by sending
MAD packets to query subnet manager port and SRP target ports."
How about replacing sentence [1] with [2] in commit message?
[2] sounds a little bit confusing to me but I think we have already
spent way too much time on discussing the commit message, so I'm fine
with [2].
Bart.
