Open MPI logo

Open MPI Development Mailing List Archives

  |   Home   |   Support   |   FAQ   |   all Development mailing list

Subject: Re: [OMPI devel] RFC: Remove all other paffinity components
From: Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) (jsquyres_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-05-15 11:11:05


Hwloc supports mac topology (not binding because osx doesn't (publicly) support binding).

But I definitely agree that soak time is necessary. I put a timeout of about 2 weeks; I thought that should be enough. But there's really no rush.

-jms
Sent from my PDA. No type good.

----- Original Message -----
From: devel-bounces_at_[hidden] <devel-bounces_at_[hidden]>
To: Open MPI Developers <devel_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Sat May 15 09:02:28 2010
Subject: Re: [OMPI devel] RFC: Remove all other paffinity components

Umm...I vote "no". I still need that "test" component to use when testing paffinity on machines that don't have all the required support (e.g., Mac).

I don't have an opinion on the other components.

On May 13, 2010, at 6:20 PM, Jeff Squyres wrote:

> WHAT: Remove all non-hwloc paffinity components.
>
> WHY: The hwloc component supports all those systems.
>
> WHERE: opal/mca/paffinity/[^hwloc|base] directories
>
> WHEN: for 1.5.1
>
> TIMEOUT: Tuesday call, May 25 (yes, about 2 weeks from now -- let hwloc soak for a while...)
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> MORE DETAILS:
>
> As you probably noticed, I have (finally) committed the "hwloc" paffinity component to the trunk and removed the "linux" (i.e., PLPA) paffinity component:
>
> https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/ompi/changeset/23125
> https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/ompi/changeset/23126
>
> hwloc supports all systems that OMPI supports (and several that OMPI doesn't!) -- more specifically, it supports all the other systems that we have paffinity components for (darwin, linux, posix, solaris, windows). It can therefore fully replace all the other paffinity components.
>
> Indeed, the new hwloc's default priority is higher than all of the other current paffinity components, so over the next week or two, it'll be a good soak test to see if it is working properly. Once we get any kinks worked out, I propose removing all the other paffinity components and leaving only hwloc.
>
> That being said, we might as well leave the paffinity framework around, even if it only has one component left, simply on the argument that someday Open MPI may support a platform that hwloc does not.
>
> --
> Jeff Squyres
> jsquyres_at_[hidden]
> For corporate legal information go to:
> http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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