preferred routing?

[CousinItt]

mesh links.png

Hi,

the pic shows five XL devices A..E, connected by links, with an XTAG debugger X attached to node A.

I'd like each node to be able to communicate with any other, but I would like the B-C link only to carry traffic directly between those two nodes. In other words, traffic between A and C should follow the path A-D-C, not A-B-C, and traffic between D, or E, and B should follow the D-A-B route and not D-C-B. I'd like to do this because I don't want the B-C link to be blocked.

Is there a way to set up the routing that would support this?

Thanks!

[CousinItt]

Nobody?

[akp]

Have you made progress with this problem? I don't know the answer but looking at this document (https://www.xmos.com/file/xconnect-architecture/) I see two options that might be relevant to your situation:
1. Set the channel ends associated with the B-C link to a different virtual network than the other channel ends (Sec 1.4), so then the traffic on your main virtual network won't be routed through that link
2. Set the B-C link as non-routed per Sec. 2.3 -- to me this seems ideal since it reduces overhead to improve your bandwidth

[CousinItt]

Hi akp,

it's nice to get a reply, so thanks.

The routing I was trying to achieve was for test purposes, but not needed for the final product so I've just done without it. Effectively the link between B and C is missing, so all messages between them would be routed B-A-D-C (and vice versa). It's a good thing none are needed. It's not clear that a solution to the problem even exists.

I don't know enough about virtual networks. Can a node be a member of more than one virtual network simultaneously? If not, this would allow B and C to have a private chat, but nothing else could talk to them, which wouldn't work for me.

I've not tried non-routed links, but it's an interesting thought. Maybe I'll give it a try when the dust has settled.

Thanks again.

[akp]

What I understand is that you can set the virtual network on a link, not a node. So you could set B-C link to virtual network 1 (for instance) and all the other links to virtual network 0. There can be 4 virtual networks. So if you transmit a message from B to any other node on virtual network 0 it would follow the A-B link, and likewise for C it would follow the C-D link. But if you transmit a message from B-C on virtual network 0 it would follow the B-C link. But I have never tried it, I am just trying to understand the documents. But in your case setting up a static link (aka non-routed link) in software rather than using the routing table might be a better bet for that high priority link.

Having said that, this feature could be useful to me in the future so if you get it to work I would be interested to hear the result.