Ralph Castain wrote:
Are we talking about CMRing such a change (r22841 perhaps?) to 1.5.2?
If so, is there already such a CMR? Or, should I (or someone better
suited for the job) file such a CMR? Which changesets? Candidate for
On Feb 15, 2011, at 9:24 AM, Eugene Loh wrote:
Ralph Castain wrote:
On Feb 14, 2011, at 9:26 PM, Abhishek Kulkarni wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2011, Ralph Castain wrote:
If the ability to turn "on" thread support is missing from 1.5, then that is an error.
No, it was changed from "--enable-mpi-threads" to "--enable-opal-multi-threads" on the trunk in r22841 .
If the changeset has not been brought over to v1.5, it indeed looks like an anachronism in the README.
My point is that it isn't an anachronism in the README, but an error in 1.5 - it needs to have the ability to turn on thread safety.
I'm not sure if we're making progress here. So far as I can tell, the v1.5 README talks about --enable-opal-multi-threads. This option does not otherwise appear in v1.5, but only in the trunk. So, to make the v1.5 README consistent with the v1.5 source code (as opposed to talking about features that will appear in unspecified future releases), either:
*) the comment should be removed from the README, or
*) opal-multi-threads should be CMRed to v1.5
My point is that option 2 needs to be done - not sure how much clearer I can be :-)
Or, are we talking about CMRing to 1.5.3? If so, the comment in
question should be pulled out of the 1.5.2 README.
I understand opal-multi-threads is A Good Thing. I'm just against
touting it in the README file when it doesn't yet exist in the bits
(equivalently, putting it in the 1.5 README when the functionality is
only in the trunk).
On Feb 14, 2011, at 5:36 PM, Eugene Loh wrote:
In the v1.5 README, I see this:
Enables thread lock support in the OPAL and ORTE layers. Does
not enable MPI_THREAD_MULTIPLE - see above option for that feature.
This is currently disabled by default.
I don't otherwise find opal-multi-threads at all in this branch. It seems to me, for such an option, one needs to move to the trunk.
Is this an error (anachronism) in the v1.5 README?