Open MPI logo

Open MPI Development Mailing List Archives

  |   Home   |   Support   |   FAQ   |   all Development mailing list

Subject: Re: [OMPI devel] [EXTERNAL] Re: SHMEM v1.7 merge proposal
From: Joshua Ladd (joshual_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-10-29 09:34:34


I think the community’s concerns are valid. What Mike is articulating is that we already maintain a “1.7 ready” OSHMEM branch internally. I think it should be a simple procedure to do as Brian and Ralph are suggesting and branch off of 1.7 in SVN and apply our patches. We can do this.

Josh

From: devel [mailto:devel-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Barrett, Brian W
Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2013 9:29 AM
To: 'Open MPI Developers'; 'Open MPI Developers'
Subject: Re: [OMPI devel] [EXTERNAL] Re: SHMEM v1.7 merge proposal

Yes, what's important is that 1) we all have a way to review the final merge (which means a public branch) and 2) it's easy for the GK to merge.

Brian



Sent with Good (www.good.com<http://www.good.com>)


-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) [jsquyres_at_[hidden]<mailto:jsquyres_at_[hidden]>]
Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2013 04:36 AM Mountain Standard Time
To: Open MPI Developers
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [OMPI devel] SHMEM v1.7 merge proposal



I think Brian's point is that it should be a SVN branch.


On Oct 29, 2013, at 3:27 AM, Mike Dubman <miked_at_[hidden]<mailto:miked_at_[hidden]>> wrote:

> Hi,
> This is exactly the way we handle it now. We have internal branch on top of v1.7 with all SHMEM code in it.
> It runs mtt and other tests.
>
> Once we done with all changes - we will provide patch (and branch direct access if needed) for GK.
>
> Kind Regards
> Mike.
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 1:02 AM, Barrett, Brian W <bwbarre_at_[hidden]<mailto:bwbarre_at_[hidden]>> wrote:
> All -
>
> Ralph and I talked today about the logistics of bringing the OpenSHMEM
> code to the 1.7 release branch, as it's now a fairly large set of changes
> from the trunk. What we propose is to follow the same proceedure we used
> when merging in the RTE framework change, which is essentially a staging
> branch. So, Mellanox (as the one filing the CMR) would branch from 1.7,
> bring the OpenSHMEM changes into that (and hopefully test), and then file
> a single CMR for the changes from the branch. If done properly, the GK
> then only has to merge with --reintegrate and we're set.
>
> Let's talk about it on the call tomorrow, but that's the current proposal.
>
> Brian
>
> --
> Brian W. Barrett
> Scalable System Software Group
> Sandia National Laboratories
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list
> devel_at_[hidden]<mailto:devel_at_[hidden]>
> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
>
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list
> devel_at_[hidden]<mailto:devel_at_[hidden]>
> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel


--
Jeff Squyres
jsquyres_at_[hidden]<mailto: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]<mailto:devel_at_[hidden]>
http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel