On Jan 9, 2009, at 12:39 AM, William Hachfeld wrote:
> Can any of the OpenMPI developers speculate as to possible
> mechanisms by which the ptrace() attachment , signal handler, or
> timer registration and corresponding signal delivery could cause
> large amounts of time to be spent within the "progress" functions of
> the OpenMPI library with an apparent lack of any real progress? Any
> ideas/information would be greatly appreciated.
Hum; interesting. I can't think of any reason why that would be a
problem offhand. The mca_btl_sm_component_progress() function is the
shared memory progression function. opal_progress() and
mca_bml_r2_progress() are likely mainly dispatching off to this
Does OSS interfere with shared memory between processes in any way?
(I'm not enough of a kernel guy to know what the ramifications of
ptrace and whatnot are)