[LU-537] LNET fails to start with aliased interface in configuration Created: 26/Jul/11 Updated: 25/Apr/13 Resolved: 14/Dec/11 |
|
| Status: | Resolved |
| Project: | Lustre |
| Component/s: | None |
| Affects Version/s: | Lustre 2.0.0 |
| Fix Version/s: | Lustre 2.2.0 |
| Type: | Improvement | Priority: | Minor |
| Reporter: | Cliff White (Inactive) | Assignee: | Liang Zhen (Inactive) |
| Resolution: | Fixed | Votes: | 0 |
| Labels: | None | ||
| Environment: |
LLNL hyperion |
||
| Rank (Obsolete): | 4802 |
| Description |
|
When specifying ip2nets, this syntax works: Either ip2nets should not use the hardware designation (ibx) or it should parse the alias properly and yield a better error message. |
| Comments |
| Comment by Liang Zhen (Inactive) [ 27/Jul/11 ] |
|
it's because kiblnd_create_dev() doesn't allow to dev_get_by_name() to return NULL (we add this for supporting failover of ib-bonding), but this can happen for aliased interface, we can fix this by simply remove the limitation and set kib_dev_t::ibd_can_failover to 0 for aliased interface. |
| Comment by Liang Zhen (Inactive) [ 27/Jul/11 ] |
|
patch is here |
| Comment by Isaac Huang (Inactive) [ 13/Sep/11 ] |
|
Cliff, I wonder why you'd need to use "o2ib0(ib0:0)" in the first place. Can you please elaborate a bit? |
| Comment by Liang Zhen (Inactive) [ 13/Sep/11 ] |
|
Isaac, one reason I want to have this patch is because we didn't use to have this limitation before we adding ib-bonding failover, so if some users had a modprobe.conf which used aliased interface, they can't use it anymore, although I don't know any strong reason of keeping use it, Thanks for review! |
| Comment by Isaac Huang (Inactive) [ 14/Sep/11 ] |
|
Actually there is one good reason why o2iblnd must support aliased interfaces. See: |
| Comment by Minh Diep [ 09/Dec/11 ] |
|
One of the issue I have seen is for a config that have bonding of two 10G tcp between a lnet router and servers. We never be able to use both links in write since the tcp session choose only 1 at a time. The solution could be is to split the osts to two different interfaces on top of the bonding. We never tried this but could use alias on top of the bond to achieve this. Not sure if it makes sense |
| Comment by Build Master (Inactive) [ 14/Dec/11 ] |
|
Integrated in Result = SUCCESS
|
| Comment by Build Master (Inactive) [ 14/Dec/11 ] |
|
Integrated in Result = SUCCESS
|
| Comment by Build Master (Inactive) [ 14/Dec/11 ] |
|
Integrated in Result = SUCCESS
|
| Comment by Build Master (Inactive) [ 14/Dec/11 ] |
|
Integrated in Result = SUCCESS
|
| Comment by Build Master (Inactive) [ 14/Dec/11 ] |
|
Integrated in Result = SUCCESS
|
| Comment by Build Master (Inactive) [ 14/Dec/11 ] |
|
Integrated in Result = SUCCESS
|
| Comment by Build Master (Inactive) [ 14/Dec/11 ] |
|
Integrated in Result = SUCCESS
|
| Comment by Build Master (Inactive) [ 14/Dec/11 ] |
|
Integrated in Result = SUCCESS
|
| Comment by Peter Jones [ 14/Dec/11 ] |
|
Landed for 2.2 |
| Comment by Build Master (Inactive) [ 14/Dec/11 ] |
|
Integrated in Result = SUCCESS
|
| Comment by Build Master (Inactive) [ 14/Dec/11 ] |
|
Integrated in Result = SUCCESS
|
| Comment by Build Master (Inactive) [ 14/Dec/11 ] |
|
Integrated in Result = SUCCESS
|
| Comment by Build Master (Inactive) [ 14/Dec/11 ] |
|
Integrated in Result = SUCCESS
|
| Comment by Build Master (Inactive) [ 14/Dec/11 ] |
|
Integrated in Result = SUCCESS
|
| Comment by Build Master (Inactive) [ 14/Dec/11 ] |
|
Integrated in Result = SUCCESS
|
| Comment by Wojciech Turek (Inactive) [ 25/Apr/13 ] |
|
Could this be also added to 2.1.x and 2.4.x tree? |