Open MPI logo

Open MPI Development Mailing List Archives

  |   Home   |   Support   |   FAQ   |   all Development mailing list

Subject: Re: [OMPI devel] RFC: Resilient ORTE
From: George Bosilca (bosilca_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-06-09 12:45:00


This will require exactly opposite registration and de-registration order, or no de-registration at all (aka no way to unload a component). Or some even more complex code to deal with internally.

If the error manager handle the callbacks it can use the registration ordering (which will be what the the approach can do), and can enforce that all callbacks will be called. I would rather prefer this approach.

  george.

On Jun 9, 2011, at 08:36 , Josh Hursey wrote:

> I would prefer returning the previous callback instead of relying on
> the errmgr to get the ordering right. Additionally, when I want to
> unregister (or replace) a call back it is easy to do that with a
> single interface, than introducing a new one to remove a particular
> callback.
> Register:
> ompi_errmgr.set_fault_callback(my_callback, prev_callback);
> Deregister:
> ompi_errmgr.set_fault_callback(prev_callback, old_callback);
> or to eliminate all callbacks (if you needed that for somme reason):
> ompi_errmgr.set_fault_callback(NULL, old_callback);