I do want in fact to bind first to one HT of each core
before binding to two HTs of one core. So that will
be possible in 1.7?
ThxJohn
On 9/11/12 11:19 PM, Ralph Castain wrote:
Not entirely sure I know what you mean. If you are talking about running
without specifying binding, then it mak
On Sep 12, 2012, at 4:57 AM, "John R. Cary" wrote:
> I do want in fact to bind first to one HT of each core
> before binding to two HTs of one core. So that will
> be possible in 1.7?
Yes - you can get a copy of the 1.7 nightly tarball and experiment with it in
advance, if you like. You'll wa
Thanks!
John
On 9/12/12 8:05 AM, Ralph Castain wrote:
On Sep 12, 2012, at 4:57 AM, "John R. Cary" wrote:
I do want in fact to bind first to one HT of each core
before binding to two HTs of one core. So that will
be possible in 1.7?
Yes - you can get a copy of the 1.7 nightly tarball and ex
A little more on this (since affinity is one of my favorite topics of late :-)
). See my blog entries about what we just did in the 1.7 branch (and SVN
trunk):
http://blogs.cisco.com/performance/taking-mpi-process-affinity-to-the-next-level/
http://blogs.cisco.com/performance/process-affinity-i
We have a long-standing philosophy that OMPI should add the bare minimum number
of preprocessor/compiler/linker flags to its wrapper compilers, and let the
user/administrator customize from there.
That being said, a looong time ago, I started a patch to add a --with-rpath
option to configure, b
(I am bringing back OMPI users to CC)
I reproduce the problem with OMPI 1.6.1 and found the problem.
mx_finalize() is called before this error occurs. So the error is
expected because calling mx_connect() after mx_finalize() is invalid.
It looks the MX component changed significantly between OMPI
Here's the r numbers with notable MX changes recently:
https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/ompi/changeset/26760
https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/ompi/changeset/26759
https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/ompi/changeset/26698
https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/ompi/changeset/26626
https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/ompi/chan
I don't recall any major modification in the MX BTL for the 1.6 with the
exception of the rework of the initialization part. There patches dealt with
avoiding the double initialization (BTL and MTL), so we might want to start
looking at those.
mx_finalize is called only from ompi_common_mx_fina
Le 12/09/2012 17:57, Jeff Squyres a écrit :
> Here's the r numbers with notable MX changes recently:
>
> https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/ompi/changeset/26698
Reverting this one fixes the problem.
And adding --mca mtl ^mx to the command works too (Doug, can you try that?)
The problem is that the MTL
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 12:05 AM, Simone Pellegrini
wrote:
> On 08/16/2011 11:15 PM, Ralph Castain wrote:
>>
>> I'm not finding a bug - the code looks clean. If I send you a patch, could
>> you apply it, rebuild, and send me the resulting debug output?
>
> yes, I could do that. No problem.
>
> tha
Okay, we've dug a bit and talked a lot :-)
If you want to do this with the default mapping system, just add
"--use-hwthreads-cpus" so we use the hwthreads as independent processors.
Otherwise, you can only bind down to the core level since we aren't treating
the HTs inside each core as separate
On Sep 12, 2012, at 9:55 AM, Brian Budge wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 12:05 AM, Simone Pellegrini
> wrote:
>> On 08/16/2011 11:15 PM, Ralph Castain wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm not finding a bug - the code looks clean. If I send you a patch, could
>>> you apply it, rebuild, and send me the resulting
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:20 AM, Jeff Squyres wrote:
> We have a long-standing philosophy that OMPI should add the bare minimum
> number of preprocessor/compiler/linker flags to its wrapper compilers, and
> let the user/administrator customize from there.
>
In general, I agree with that philoso
George -- you're the owner of this part of the code. What do you want to do
here?
On Sep 12, 2012, at 12:37 PM, Brice Goglin wrote:
> Le 12/09/2012 17:57, Jeff Squyres a écrit :
>> Here's the r numbers with notable MX changes recently:
>>
>> https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/ompi/changeset/26698
>
Thank you!
I'll put this on the trunk and the upcoming releases. This is too late for
v1.6.2, but it can be in 1.6.3.
On Sep 10, 2012, at 4:22 PM, Brooks Davis wrote:
> The test for SCTP support in libc on FreeBSD only allows it to work on
> FreeBSD 7 (or I suppose 70 :). That attached patch
15 matches
Mail list logo
