[LU-3836] There is no error message when setting priority > 1 for lnet routes Created: 26/Aug/13 Updated: 27/Aug/13 Resolved: 27/Aug/13 |
|
| Status: | Closed |
| Project: | Lustre |
| Component/s: | None |
| Affects Version/s: | Lustre 2.5.0 |
| Fix Version/s: | None |
| Type: | Bug | Priority: | Minor |
| Reporter: | Sarah Liu | Assignee: | WC Triage |
| Resolution: | Not a Bug | Votes: | 0 |
| Labels: | None | ||
| Environment: |
server and client: lustre-master build #1627 |
||
| Issue Links: |
|
||||||||
| Severity: | 3 | ||||||||
| Rank (Obsolete): | 9933 | ||||||||
| Description |
|
According to the test plan attached on [root@wtm-77 ~]# modprobe lnet LNet: HW CPU cores: 32, npartitions: 4 alg: No test for crc32 (crc32-table) alg: No test for adler32 (adler32-zlib) alg: No test for crc32 (crc32-pclmul) padlock: VIA PadLock Hash Engine not detected. [root@wtm-77 ~]# lctl network up LNet: Added LNI 10.10.18.208@tcp [8/256/0/180] LNet: Accept all, port 7988 LNET configured [root@wtm-77 ~]# cat /proc/sys/lnet/routes Routing disabled net hops priority state router o2ib 1 2 up 10.10.18.199@tcp |
| Comments |
| Comment by Andreas Dilger [ 26/Aug/13 ] |
|
Doug, please confirm but my understanding is that the design of the router priority changed after the comments in that bug to allow a range of priorities. |
| Comment by Doug Oucharek (Inactive) [ 26/Aug/13 ] |
|
Andreas: correct. The test plan will need to be updated for this ticket. |