Okay, I understood. Actually speaking, so far I do not have a definite
problem about that. If I encounter some problems in future, I will tell
you.
Regards,
Tetsuya Mishima
> Guess I disagree - it isn't a question of what the code can handle, but
rather user expectation. If you specify a defini
Guess I disagree - it isn't a question of what the code can handle, but rather
user expectation. If you specify a definite number of cores for each process,
then we have to bind to core in order to meet that directive. Binding to numa
won't do it as the OS will continue to schedule the proc on o
Your fix worked for me, thanks.
By the way, I noticed that "bind-to obj" is forcibly override by "bind-to
core", when pe=N is specified.
This is just my opinion, but I think it's too conservative and a kind of
regression from the openmpi-1.6.5. For example, "-map-by slot:pe=N -bind-to
numa" loo
Okay, I fixed it. Keep getting caught by a very, very unfortunate design flaw
in hwloc that forces you to treat cache's as a special case that requires you
to call a different function. So you have to constantly protect function calls
into hwloc with "if cache, call this one - else, call that on
Hi Ralph,
Since the ticket #4240 has been already set as fixed, I'm sending this
email to you. ( I don't konw I could add comments to the fixed ticket)
When I tried to bind the process to l3chace, it didn't work like below:
(the host mangae has the normal topology - not inverted)
[mishima@manag
