Open MPI logo

Open MPI Development Mailing List Archives

  |   Home   |   Support   |   FAQ   |   all Development mailing list

Subject: Re: [OMPI devel] [EXTERNAL] Re: RFC: remove opal progress recursion depth counter
From: Hjelm, Nathan T (hjelmn_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-12-19 14:24:01


Yes. I will do that once I finish preparing the ORNL collectives for the trunk. Will be 8pm at the latest.

-Nathan
________________________________________
From: devel [devel-bounces_at_[hidden]] on behalf of Barrett, Brian W [bwbarre_at_[hidden]]
Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2013 10:24 AM
To: Open MPI Developers
Subject: Re: [OMPI devel] [EXTERNAL] Re: RFC: remove opal progress recursion depth counter

Nathan -

Any chance you can remove the two counters this afternoon?

Brian

On 12/19/13 10:01 AM, "Jeff Squyres (jsquyres)" <jsquyres_at_[hidden]> wrote:

>I think there's no problem with removing them from the dll code -- that
>stuff doesn't affect MPI application ABI.
>
>
>On Dec 19, 2013, at 9:42 AM, Barrett, Brian W <bwbarre_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
>> Someone who understands the mpi debugging handles code:
>>
>> The opal_progress_recursion_depth_counter and
>>opal_progress_thread_counter
>> are both only used internally in opal_progress (for book keeping, but
>> never any decisions) and are declared in ompi_mpihandles_dll.c, but then
>> don't appear to be used. Is there a disadvantage to:
>>
>> 1) removing them from mpihandles_dll.c
>>
>> or, if that breaks ABI,
>>
>> 2) Leaving them, but not doing the bookkeeping?
>>
>> It's fairly heavyweight bookkeeping, so I agree with Nathan, I'd like to
>> remove it. But I'd like to remove it pre-1.7.4. Which means today.
>>
>> Brian
>>
>>
>> On 12/18/13 4:40 PM, "Nathan Hjelm" <hjelmn_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>
>>> Opps, yeah. Meant 1.7.5. If people agree with this change I could
>>> possibly slip it in before Friday but that is unlikely.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 03:32:36PM -0800, Ralph Castain wrote:
>>>> Ummmm....1.7.4 is leaving the station on Fri, Nathan, so next Tues =>
>>>> will have to go into 1.7.5
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Dec 18, 2013, at 3:23 PM, Nathan Hjelm <hjelmn_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> What: Remove the opal_progress_recursion_depth_counter from
>>>>> opal_progress.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why: This counter adds two atomic adds to the critical path when
>>>>> OPAL_HAVE_THREADS is set (which is the case for most builds). I
>>>> grepped
>>>>> through ompi, orte, and opal to find where this value was being used
>>>> and
>>>>> did not find anything either inside or outside opal_progress.
>>>>>
>>>>> When: I want this change to go into 1.7.4 (if possible) so setting a
>>>>> quick timeout for next Tuesday.
>>>>>
>>>>> Let me know if there is a good reason to keep this counter and it
>>>>>will
>>>>> be spared.
>>>>>
>>>>> -Nathan Hjelm
>>>>> HPC-5, LANL
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 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
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> 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
>
>
>--
>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