Open MPI logo

Open MPI Development Mailing List Archives

  |   Home   |   Support   |   FAQ   |   all Development mailing list

Subject: Re: [OMPI devel] [RFC] Remove explicit call to progress() from ob1.
From: Jeff Squyres (jsquyres_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-02-12 17:57:22


Were these supposed to cover the time required for pinning and
unpinning?

Can you explain why you think they're unnecessary?

On Feb 12, 2008, at 5:27 AM, Gleb Natapov wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I am planning to commit the following patch. Those two progress()
> calls
> are responsible for most of our deep recursion troubles. And I also
> think they are completely unnecessary.
>
> diff --git a/ompi/mca/pml/ob1/pml_ob1_recvreq.c b/ompi/mca/pml/ob1/
> pml_ob1_recvreq.c
> index 5899243..641176e 100644
> --- a/ompi/mca/pml/ob1/pml_ob1_recvreq.c
> +++ b/ompi/mca/pml/ob1/pml_ob1_recvreq.c
> @@ -704,9 +704,6 @@ int mca_pml_ob1_recv_request_schedule_once(
> mca_bml_base_free(bml_btl,dst);
> continue;
> }
> -
> - /* run progress as the prepare (pinning) can take some time
> */
> - mca_bml.bml_progress();
> }
>
> return OMPI_SUCCESS;
> diff --git a/ompi/mca/pml/ob1/pml_ob1_sendreq.c b/ompi/mca/pml/ob1/
> pml_ob1_sendreq.c
> index 0998a05..9d7f3f9 100644
> --- a/ompi/mca/pml/ob1/pml_ob1_sendreq.c
> +++ b/ompi/mca/pml/ob1/pml_ob1_sendreq.c
> @@ -968,7 +968,6 @@ cannot_pack:
> mca_bml_base_free(bml_btl,des);
> continue;
> }
> - mca_bml.bml_progress();
> }
>
> return OMPI_SUCCESS;
> --
> Gleb.
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list
> devel_at_[hidden]
> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel

-- 
Jeff Squyres
Cisco Systems