[gpfsug-discuss] Any experience running native GPFS 4.2.1 on Xeon Phi node booted with Centos 7.3?

[Felipe Knop]

All,

The SMAP issue has been addressed in GPFS in 4.2.1.1.

See http://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/STXKQY/gpfsclustersfaq.html

Q2.4.

  Felipe

----
Felipe Knop                                     knop at us.ibm.com
GPFS Development and Security
IBM Systems
IBM Building 008
2455 South Rd, Poughkeepsie, NY 12601
(845) 433-9314  T/L 293-9314





From:   Aaron Knister <aaron.knister at gmail.com>
To:     gpfsug main discussion list <gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org>
Date:   12/07/2016 09:25 AM
Subject:        Re: [gpfsug-discuss] Any experience running native GPFS 
4.2.1 on Xeon Phi node booted with Centos 7.3?
Sent by:        gpfsug-discuss-bounces at spectrumscale.org



I don't know if this applies her but I seem to recall an issue with CentOS 
7 (newer 3.X and on kernels), Broadwell processors and GPFS where GPFS 
upset SMAP and would eventually get the node expelled. I think this may be 
fixed in newer GPFS releases but the fix is to boot the kernel with the 
nosmap parameter. Might be worth a try. I'm not clear on whether SMAP is 
supported by the Xeon Phi's. 

-Aaron

On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 5:34 AM <david_johnson at brown.edu> wrote:
IBM says it should work ok, we are not so sure. We had node expels that 
stopped when we turned off gpfs on that node. Has anyone had better luck?

 -- ddj
Dave Johnson
_______________________________________________
gpfsug-discuss mailing list
gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org
http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
_______________________________________________
gpfsug-discuss mailing list
gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org
http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gpfsug.org/pipermail/gpfsug-discuss_gpfsug.org/attachments/20161207/48aa0319/attachment-0002.htm>