Understood, and your logic is correct. It's just that I'd rather each launcher
decide to declare the daemons as reported rather than doing it in the common
code, just in case someone writes a launcher where they choose to respond
differently to the case where no new daemons need to be launched.
On Mar 17, 2014, at 6:43 PM, tmish...@jcity.maeda.co.jp wrote:
>
>
> I do not understand your fix yet, but it would be better, I guess.
>
> I'll check it later, but now please let me expalin what I thought:
>
> If some nodes are allocated, it doen't go through this part because
> opal_list_get_size(&nodes) > 0 at this location.
>
> 1590 if (0 == opal_list_get_size(&nodes)) {
> 1591 OPAL_OUTPUT_VERBOSE((5,
> orte_plm_base_framework.framework_output,
> 1592 "%s plm:base:setup_vm only HNP in
> allocation",
> 1593 ORTE_NAME_PRINT(ORTE_PROC_MY_NAME)));
> 1594 /* cleanup */
> 1595 OBJ_DESTRUCT(&nodes);
> 1596 /* mark that the daemons have reported so we can proceed */
> 1597 daemons->state = ORTE_JOB_STATE_DAEMONS_REPORTED;
> 1598 daemons->updated = false;
> 1599 return ORTE_SUCCESS;
> 1600 }
>
> After filtering, opal_list_get_size(&nodes) becomes zero at this location.
> That's why I think I should add two lines 1597,1598 to the if-clause below.
>
> 1660 if (0 == opal_list_get_size(&nodes)) {
> 1661 OPAL_OUTPUT_VERBOSE((5,
> orte_plm_base_framework.framework_output,
> 1662 "%s plm:base:setup_vm only HNP left",
> 1663 ORTE_NAME_PRINT(ORTE_PROC_MY_NAME)));
> 1664 OBJ_DESTRUCT(&nodes);
> 1665 return ORTE_SUCCESS;
>
> Tetsuya
>
>> Hmm...no, I don't think that's the correct patch. We want that function
> to remain "clean" as it's job is simply to construct the list of nodes for
> the VM. It's the responsibility of the launcher to
>> decide what to do with it.
>>
>> Please see https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/ompi/ticket/4408 for a fix
>>
>> Ralph
>>
>> On Mar 17, 2014, at 5:40 PM, tmish...@jcity.maeda.co.jp wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Hi Ralph, I found another corner case hangup in openmpi-1.7.5rc3.
>>>
>>> Condition:
>>> 1. allocate some nodes using RM such as TORQUE.
>>> 2. request the head node only in executing the job with
>>> -host or -hostfile option.
>>>
>>> Example:
>>> 1. allocate node05,node06 using TORQUE.
>>> 2. request node05 only with -host option
>>>
>>> [mishima@manage ~]$ qsub -I -l nodes=node05+node06
>>> qsub: waiting for job 8661.manage.cluster to start
>>> qsub: job 8661.manage.cluster ready
>>>
>>> [mishima@node05 ~]$ cat $PBS_NODEFILE
>>> node05
>>> node06
>>> [mishima@node05 ~]$ mpirun -np 1 -host node05
> ~/mis/openmpi/demos/myprog
>>> << hang here >>
>>>
>>> And, my fix for plm_base_launch_support.c is as follows:
>>> --- plm_base_launch_support.c 2014-03-12 05:51:45.000000000 +0900
>>> +++ plm_base_launch_support.try.c 2014-03-18 08:38:03.000000000
> +0900
>>> @@ -1662,7 +1662,11 @@
>>> OPAL_OUTPUT_VERBOSE((5,
> orte_plm_base_framework.framework_output,
>>> "%s plm:base:setup_vm only HNP left",
>>> ORTE_NAME_PRINT(ORTE_PROC_MY_NAME)));
>>> + /* cleanup */
>>> OBJ_DESTRUCT(&nodes);
>>> + /* mark that the daemons have reported so we can proceed */
>>> + daemons->state = ORTE_JOB_STATE_DAEMONS_REPORTED;
>>> + daemons->updated = false;
>>> return ORTE_SUCCESS;
>>> }
>>>
>>> Tetsuya
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> users mailing list
>>> us...@open-mpi.org
>>> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> users mailing list
>> us...@open-mpi.org
>> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users
>
> _______________________________________________
> users mailing list
> us...@open-mpi.org
> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users
