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

[David D. Johnson]

Yes, we saw the SMAP issue on earlier releases, added the kernel command line option to disable it.
That is not the issue for this node. The Phi processors do not support that cpu feature.

 — ddj

> On Dec 7, 2016, at 9:37 AM, Felipe Knop <knop at us.ibm.com> wrote:
> 
> All,
> 
> The SMAP issue has been addressed in GPFS in 4.2.1.1.
> 
> See http://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/STXKQY/gpfsclustersfaq.html <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 <mailto: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://spectrumscale.org/>
> http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss <http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss>_______________________________________________
> gpfsug-discuss mailing list
> gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org
> http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss <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/20161207/92819f21/attachment.htm>