[LU-5098] /proc/sys/lnet/routes is stupid

• Type: Improvement
• Resolution: Won't Do
• Priority: Minor
• Labels: llnl
• Assignee: Amir Shehata (Inactive)
• Reporter: Christopher Morrone (Inactive)

Description

Presently /proc/sys/lnet/routers presents information about two more-or-less orthogonal concepts:

1. Whether this node is has lnet forwarding enabled (is itself acting as a router)
2. A list of networks that can be reached through peer nodes that are acting as routers

Examples:

Routing disabled
net      hops   state router
tcp         1      up 10.1.1.75@o2ib9
tcp1        1      up 10.1.1.75@o2ib9
tcp2        1    down 10.1.1.161@o2ib9
tcp3        1    down 10.1.1.162@o2ib9
tcp4        1      up 10.1.1.75@o2ib9
o2ib2       1      up 10.1.1.159@o2ib9
o2ib2       1      up 10.1.1.160@o2ib9
o2ib6       1      up 10.1.1.52@o2ib9
o2ib6       1      up 10.1.1.51@o2ib9
o2ib6       1      up 10.1.1.53@o2ib9
o2ib6       1      up 10.1.1.54@o2ib9
o2ib100     1      up 10.1.1.75@o2ib9
o2ib500     1      up 10.1.1.75@o2ib9

Routing enabled
net      hops   state router

The first "Routing [enabled|disabled]" line should be not be in the routes file. There should be a separate proc file for that.

Issue Links

• is related to: LU-2456 Dynamic LNet Config Main Development Work

Comments

[Amir Shehata (Inactive)]

If this is an acceptable solution all around I can do that.

[James A Simmons]

Since this is the case can we link this ticket to LU-2456.

[Amir Shehata (Inactive)]

With DLC, the lnetctl utility will provide the same information with two separate commands. Would we still want to modify the proc files?

[Peter Jones]

Amir

Could you please advise on this one?

Thanks

Peter