FWIW, I just finished testing with knem support enabled. Looks good.
On Aug 6, 2012, at 2:21 PM, Jeff Squyres wrote:
> I've run this hg tree with the intel, IBM, and IMB suites on a Romley server with 20 cores for NP values of 2,3,4,...,19,20. The only failures were the IBM spawn tests (which are expected, because I ran with "--mca btl sm,self").
> So -- +1 on this from me (disclaimer: I haven't looked at the code).
> On Aug 5, 2012, at 6:38 AM, Gutierrez, Samuel K wrote:
>> The majority of the code required to get away from explicit RML usage during
>> shared memory initialization is complete. With this update, the sm BTL and sm
>> mpool modex around the information required for setup.
>> I've completed some initial testing and everything seems to be working
>> properly, but additional testing and feedback is greatly appreciated -- and
>> almost certainly required.
>> Things that haven't been tested:
>> o The sm BTL with progress threads enabled (OMPI_ENABLE_PROGRESS_THREADS).
>> o The sm BTL with any kernel assistance enabled.
>> WHY: In preparation for the eventual BTL move.
>> M opal/mca/shmem/posix/shmem_posix_module.c
>> M opal/mca/shmem/sysv/shmem_sysv_module.c
>> M opal/mca/shmem/mmap/shmem_mmap_module.c
>> M opal/mca/shmem/windows/shmem_windows_module.c
>> M ompi/mca/btl/sm/btl_sm.c
>> M ompi/mca/btl/sm/btl_sm_component.c
>> M ompi/mca/btl/sm/help-mpi-btl-sm.txt
>> M ompi/mca/btl/sm/btl_sm.h
>> M ompi/mca/btl/sm/btl_sm_fifo.h
>> M ompi/mca/mpool/sm/mpool_sm_component.c
>> M ompi/mca/mpool/sm/mpool_sm.h
>> M ompi/mca/common/sm/common_sm.c
>> M ompi/mca/common/sm/common_sm.h
>> The majority of changes that most will care about are in btl/sm/* and mpool/sm/*
>> The branch can be found:
>> TIMEOUT: If everything looks okay, Aug 10, 2012. If not, some time after issues
>> have been resolved.
>> devel mailing list
> Jeff Squyres
> For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/
> devel mailing list