Open MPI logo

Open MPI Development Mailing List Archives

  |   Home   |   Support   |   FAQ   |   all Development mailing list

Subject: Re: [OMPI devel] [EXTERNAL] Re: shmem vs. oshmem
From: Mike Dubman (miked_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-10-28 15:08:39


I would prefer to keep both names for a while and depricate them gradually.
I suggest to release 1st drop with both namings and drop legacy right after
that.

On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 8:22 PM, Barrett, Brian W <bwbarre_at_[hidden]>wrote:

> I'm not sure what we gain by having them. It's a new (to us) product;
> let's not support legacy names.
>
> Brian
>
> On 10/28/13 11:40 AM, "Jeff Squyres (jsquyres)" <jsquyres_at_[hidden]>
> wrote:
>
> >Ah -- my mistake in the original post: I now see that it installs *both*
> >shmemcc and oshcc (and friends). I didn't notice the osh* versions in my
> >initial post.
> >
> >The question still remains, though -- do we still want these names
> >installed:
> >
> >-----
> >$ cd $prefix/bin
> >$ ls -1 shmem*
> >shmemcc@
> >shmemfort@
> >shmemrun@
> >-----
> >
> >
> >On Oct 28, 2013, at 1:03 PM, Mike Dubman <miked_at_[hidden]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Thanks Brian,
> >> The code in trunk already generates:
> >>
> >> oshcc oshfort oshmem_info oshrun
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 12:13 AM, Barrett, Brian W <bwbarre_at_[hidden]>
> >>wrote:
> >> i thought I mentioned this before, but the compilers should be oshcc,
> >>oshCC, and oshfort, with the starter named oshrun, according to Appendix
> >>C of the spec.
> >>
> >> Brian
> >>
> >> --
> >> Brian W. Barrett
> >> Scalable System Software Group
> >> Sandia National Laboratories
> >> ________________________________________
> >> From: devel [devel-bounces_at_[hidden]] on behalf of Jeff Squyres
> >>(jsquyres) [jsquyres_at_[hidden]]
> >> Sent: Friday, October 25, 2013 3:32 PM
> >> To: Open MPI Developers
> >> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [OMPI devel] shmem vs. oshmem
> >>
> >> On Oct 25, 2013, at 12:58 PM, Igor Ivanov <Igor.Ivanov_at_[hidden]>
> >>wrote:
> >>
> >> >> - shmemcc / shmemfort / shmem_info / shmemrun
> >> >> --> should these all be "oshmem*" ?
> >> >>
> >> >> - the examples are hello_shmem* and ring_shmem*
> >> >> --> should these all be "*_oshmem*" ?
> >> > These examples are not OpenSHMEM specific.
> >> >>
> >> >> - there are header files named shmem*
> >> >> --> I'm guessing the names "shmem.h" and "shmem.fh" are mandated
> >> > OpenSHMEM specification says
> >>
> >> So ya, those names are standardized -- no problem.
> >>
> >> But shouldn't we be branding everything else as oshmem? Even if the
> >>examples are not oshmem-specific.
> >>
> >> We're shipping oshmem, not shmem, so why not call them oshmem examples
> >>[that also happen to be shmem examples] -- rather than shmem examples
> >>[that also happen to be oshmem examples]?
> >>
> >> --
> >> 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
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> devel mailing list
> >> devel_at_[hidden]
> >> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
> >
> >
> >--
> >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
> >
>
>
> --
> Brian W. Barrett
> Scalable System Software Group
> Sandia National Laboratories
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list
> devel_at_[hidden]
> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
>