Open MPI logo

Open MPI Development Mailing List Archives

  |   Home   |   Support   |   FAQ   |   all Development mailing list

Subject: Re: [OMPI devel] [EXTERNAL] Consequence of bind-to-core by default
From: Ralph Castain (rhc_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-12-19 10:43:09


On Dec 19, 2013, at 6:27 AM, Barrett, Brian W <bwbarre_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> On 12/19/13 6:59 AM, "Jeff Squyres (jsquyres)" <jsquyres_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
>> 3. Finally, we're giving a warning saying:
>>
>> -----
>> WARNING: a request was made to bind a process. While the system
>> supports binding the process itself, at least one node does NOT
>> support binding memory to the process location.
>> -----
>>
>> For both #1 and #3, I wonder if we shouldn't be warning if no binding was
>> explicitly stated (i.e., we're just using the defaults). Specifically,
>> if no binding is specified:
>>
>> - if we oversubscribe, (possibly) warn about the performance loss of
>> oversubscription, and don't bind
>> - don't warn about lack of memory binding
>
> We have a couple machines where memory binding is failing for one reason
> or another. If we're binding by default, we really shouldn't throw error
> messages about not being able to bind memory. It's REALLY annoying.

Just to help me understand a bit better - you are saying that the node supports process binding, but not memory binding? I don't see how the error appears otherwise, but want to ensure I understand the code path.

>
> Brian
>
> --
> 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