X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Received: by onstor-exch02.onstor.net 
	id <01C8700C.838265D8@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 12:54:02 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C8700C.838265D8"
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: Are the FPs created equal...
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 12:54:02 -0700
Message-ID: <BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E0862724C@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>
In-Reply-To: <BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E07A8D9C9@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic: Are the FPs created equal...
Thread-Index: AchwCzoM8jv1Q+rLSEW5yIejKkzakAAAS+YA
References: <BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E07A8D9C9@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>
From: "Maxim Kozlovsky" <maxim.kozlovsky@onstor.com>
To: "Mike Lee" <mike.lee@onstor.com>
Cc: "dl-Cougar" <dl-Cougar@onstor.com>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C8700C.838265D8
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hello,

Just use FP_ANY. Since all FPs are equal there could not possibly be a
reason to try to pick up a particular FP.

Max

_____________________________________________
From: Mike Lee=20
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 11:46 AM
To: Maxim Kozlovsky
Cc: dl-Cougar
Subject: Are the FPs created equal...

Hi Max:

I found that sending RMC messages from the SSC to FP3 and FP4 does not
seem to work, while sending to FP1 and FP2 works to expectation.

This assessment is based on the fact that when I intercept the FP-bound
RMC message in rmc_internal_senddata() (ssc-rmc/rmc.c) and force the
destination CPU to be 2 or 3 (or 7 for "any"), then message gets to the
destination (and NDMP does not hang):
        if ((sess->raddr.eaddr.seee_cpu !=3D 2) &&
            (sess->raddr.eaddr.seee_cpu !=3D 3)) {
	    sess->raddr.eaddr.seee_cpu =3D 7;
        }

If the cpu id had been 4 (FP3) or 5 (FP4), then the RMC message would
seem to get sent successfully, i.e. no error returned from sendmsg() /
sendto(), but the management bus driver code would not receive it to do
the FP-forwarding.

My questions are:
a. are the FPs created equal?=20
b. is my "hack" logic above an acceptable workaround?
c. what Onstor code gets executed between sendto() on the SSC and the
mgmtBus_rxPacket() on the TxRx?  I think something is missing in that
the new Cougar FPs are not fully supported.

Thanks for your help again.

-Mike

------_=_NextPart_001_01C8700C.838265D8
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dus-ascii">
<META NAME=3D"Generator" CONTENT=3D"MS Exchange Server version =
6.5.7653.38">
<TITLE>RE: Are the FPs created equal...</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<!-- Converted from text/rtf format -->

<P DIR=3DLTR><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"></SPAN><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"><FONT =
COLOR=3D"#000080" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">Hello,</FONT></SPAN></P>

<P DIR=3DLTR><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"><FONT COLOR=3D"#000080" SIZE=3D2 =
FACE=3D"Arial">Just use FP_ANY. Since all FPs are equal there could not =
possibly be a reason to try to pick up a particular =
FP.</FONT></SPAN></P>

<P DIR=3DLTR><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"><FONT COLOR=3D"#000080" SIZE=3D2 =
FACE=3D"Arial">Max</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"></SPAN><SPAN =
LANG=3D"en-us"></SPAN></P>

<P DIR=3DLTR><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"></SPAN><SPAN =
LANG=3D"en-us"></SPAN></P>

<P DIR=3DLTR><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"></SPAN><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"><FONT =
SIZE=3D2 =
FACE=3D"Tahoma">_____________________________________________<BR>
</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"><B></B></SPAN><SPAN =
LANG=3D"en-us"><B><FONT SIZE=3D2 =
FACE=3D"Tahoma">From:</FONT></B></SPAN><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"></SPAN><SPAN =
LANG=3D"en-us"><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Tahoma"> Mike Lee<BR>
</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"><B></B></SPAN><SPAN =
LANG=3D"en-us"><B><FONT SIZE=3D2 =
FACE=3D"Tahoma">Sent:</FONT></B></SPAN><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"></SPAN><SPAN =
LANG=3D"en-us"><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Tahoma"> Friday, February 15, 2008 =
11:46 AM<BR>
</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"><B></B></SPAN><SPAN =
LANG=3D"en-us"><B><FONT SIZE=3D2 =
FACE=3D"Tahoma">To:</FONT></B></SPAN><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"></SPAN><SPAN =
LANG=3D"en-us"><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Tahoma"> Maxim Kozlovsky<BR>
</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"><B></B></SPAN><SPAN =
LANG=3D"en-us"><B><FONT SIZE=3D2 =
FACE=3D"Tahoma">Cc:</FONT></B></SPAN><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"></SPAN><SPAN =
LANG=3D"en-us"><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Tahoma"> dl-Cougar<BR>
</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"><B></B></SPAN><SPAN =
LANG=3D"en-us"><B><FONT SIZE=3D2 =
FACE=3D"Tahoma">Subject:</FONT></B></SPAN><SPAN =
LANG=3D"en-us"></SPAN><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"><FONT SIZE=3D2 =
FACE=3D"Tahoma"> Are the FPs created equal...</FONT></SPAN><SPAN =
LANG=3D"en-us"></SPAN></P>

<P DIR=3DLTR><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"></SPAN><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"><FONT =
SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">Hi Max:</FONT></SPAN></P>

<P DIR=3DLTR><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">I found =
that sending RMC messages from the SSC to FP3 and FP4 does not seem to =
work, while sending to FP1 and FP2 works to =
expectation.</FONT></SPAN></P>

<P DIR=3DLTR><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">This =
assessment is based on the fact that when I intercept the FP-bound RMC =
message in rmc_internal_senddata() (ssc-rmc/rmc.c) and force the =
destination CPU to be 2 or 3 (or 7 for &quot;any&quot;), then message =
gets to the destination (and NDMP does not hang):</FONT></SPAN></P>

<P DIR=3DLTR><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"><FONT SIZE=3D2 =
FACE=3D"Arial">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; if =
((sess-&gt;raddr.eaddr.seee_cpu !=3D 2) &amp;&amp;</FONT></SPAN></P>

<P DIR=3DLTR><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"><FONT SIZE=3D2 =
FACE=3D"Arial">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbs=
p;&nbsp; (sess-&gt;raddr.eaddr.seee_cpu !=3D 3)) {</FONT></SPAN></P>

<P DIR=3DLTR><SPAN =
LANG=3D"en-us">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <FONT SIZE=3D2 =
FACE=3D"Arial">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; sess-&gt;raddr.eaddr.seee_cpu =3D =
7;</FONT></SPAN></P>

<P DIR=3DLTR><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"><FONT SIZE=3D2 =
FACE=3D"Arial">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
}</FONT></SPAN></P>

<P DIR=3DLTR><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">If the =
cpu id had been 4 (FP3) or 5 (FP4), then the RMC message would seem to =
get sent successfully, i.e. no error returned from sendmsg() / sendto(), =
but the management bus driver code would not receive it to do the =
FP-forwarding.</FONT></SPAN></P>

<P DIR=3DLTR><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">My =
questions are:</FONT></SPAN></P>

<P DIR=3DLTR><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">a. are =
the FPs created equal? </FONT></SPAN></P>

<P DIR=3DLTR><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">b. is my =
&quot;hack&quot; logic above an acceptable workaround?</FONT></SPAN></P>

<P DIR=3DLTR><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">c. what =
Onstor code gets executed between sendto() on the SSC and the =
mgmtBus_rxPacket() on the TxRx?&nbsp; I think something is missing in =
that the new Cougar FPs are not fully supported.</FONT></SPAN></P>

<P DIR=3DLTR><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">Thanks =
for your help again.</FONT></SPAN></P>

<P DIR=3DLTR><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"><FONT SIZE=3D2 =
FACE=3D"Arial">-Mike</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"></SPAN><SPAN =
LANG=3D"en-us"></SPAN></P>

</BODY>
</HTML>
------_=_NextPart_001_01C8700C.838265D8--
