Open MPI logo

Open MPI Development Mailing List Archives

  |   Home   |   Support   |   FAQ   |  

This web mail archive is frozen.

This page is part of a frozen web archive of this mailing list.

You can still navigate around this archive, but know that no new mails have been added to it since July of 2016.

Click here to be taken to the new web archives of this list; it includes all the mails that are in this frozen archive plus all new mails that have been sent to the list since it was migrated to the new archives.

Subject: Re: [OMPI devel] MCA component open
From: Josh Hursey (jjhursey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-05-02 16:40:50


We could also call it 'null' for the empty set of components? Or maybe
OMPI-NULL.

Outside of the naming do others this this is a useful feature to
implement?

-- Josh

On May 2, 2008, at 10:51 AM, Ralph Castain wrote:

> I would think that adding a special keyword would be the correct
> method. I
> would suggest something with an "ompi" in it, perhaps capitalized so
> there
> is no confusion...something like "OMPI-NONE"?
>
>
> On 5/2/08 8:37 AM, "Josh Hursey" <jjhursey_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
>> I don't believe we have the logic in place to tell mca_component_open
>> 'do not open anything'. (I could be wrong though).
>>
>> Adding such an option might be useful, but we would have to consider
>> how that option should be specified by the user. Currently if you do
>> not set a value (leave empty space in mca-params.conf) then the MCA
>> system takes this to indicate that all components are eligible for
>> selection. If you specify any options then only those options should
>> be opened. We could add a special keyword (such as 'none') to
>> indicate
>> 'open nothing'.
>>
>> What do people think about that?
>>
>> -- Josh
>>
>>
>> On May 2, 2008, at 10:22 AM, Ralph Castain wrote:
>>
>>> I see what the problem is. In the case of slurm, I don't want -any-
>>> components to be opened, even though I am going to call plm open/
>>> select. I
>>> have to leave that logic in place for those environments that -do-
>>> want to
>>> specify some backend secondary launcher.
>>>
>>> So the question is: how do I tell mca_component_open "do not open
>>> anything"?
>>>
>>> If we don't have a mechanism for doing that, can we create one?
>>>
>>>
>>> On 5/2/08 8:02 AM, "Ralph Castain" <rhc_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Well, I have a current version of the trunk. I add an MCA param to
>>>> the
>>>> environment indicating that only rsh is to be used by the orted.
>>>> Yet I get
>>>> an output from every orted indicating that slurm (misspelled!) is
>>>> available
>>>> for selection.
>>>>
>>>> This tells me that the slurm component is being opened, even though
>>>> the
>>>> param is set.
>>>>
>>>> I can check again to ensure that the param is set...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 5/2/08 7:53 AM, "Jeff Squyres" <jsquyres_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> (moving to devel list for wider audience)
>>>>>
>>>>> Hmm. I thought the UTK stuff from a while ago supposedly changed
>>>>> this
>>>>> behavior to only open the components that were specifically
>>>>> requested.
>>>>>
>>>>> This behavior looks like the *original* MCA behavior -- open them
>>>>> all,
>>>>> then discard what we don't want (but doesn't necessarily reclaim
>>>>> the
>>>>> memory because of how dlclose works).
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On May 2, 2008, at 9:48 AM, Ralph Castain wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Yo guys
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've noticed something on the trunk that just doesn't strike me
>>>>>> as
>>>>>> correct.
>>>>>> If I specify "-mca plm rsh", it is my expectation that (a) only
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> rsh
>>>>>> component will be opened, and (b) only the rsh module will be
>>>>>> selected,
>>>>>> unless that component indicates that it cannot run.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What I am seeing, though, is that -all- the plm components are
>>>>>> being
>>>>>> opened.
>>>>>> This is not only unnecessary, but consumes memory and leads to
>>>>>> concern over
>>>>>> whether or not some other module could become active.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is this the intended behavior? If so, may I suggest we change
>>>>>> it in
>>>>>> Josh's
>>>>>> branch prior to bringing it over?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ralph
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> devel mailing list
>>>> devel_at_[hidden]
>>>> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> devel mailing list
>>> devel_at_[hidden]
>>> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> devel mailing list
>> devel_at_[hidden]
>> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list
> devel_at_[hidden]
> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel