Open MPI logo

Hardware Locality Development Mailing List Archives

  |   Home   |   Support   |   FAQ   |  

This web mail archive is frozen.

This page is part of a frozen web archive of this mailing list.

You can still navigate around this archive, but know that no new mails have been added to it since July of 2016.

Click here to be taken to the new web archives of this list; it includes all the mails that are in this frozen archive plus all new mails that have been sent to the list since it was migrated to the new archives.

Subject: Re: [hwloc-devel] Priority of env vars vs. application options
From: Brice Goglin (Brice.Goglin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-10-28 09:54:16

Jeff Squyres wrote:
> On Oct 28, 2009, at 9:29 AM, Samuel Thibault wrote:
>> > I would think that the API *only* looks at the names passed as
>> > parameters -- command line, env variable, etc. are upper-layer
>> > abstractions added by top-level tools like lstopo, etc.
>> See Brice's case, where it's not the user that provides the xml file,
>> but a deployment tool.
> Ya, I saw that. For a small tool like the hwloc library, it doesn't
> feel right to offer back-door hooks that can circumvent the
> application. If an application is buggy, then the application should
> be fixed -- it doesn't seem like the right thing to intentionally add
> hooks just to accommodate buggy applications. Is that what you're
> suggesting, or am I missing the point?

It's not (only) about buggy applications, the bug could in hwloc as
well. You might want to check the hwloc behavior with this application
if the topology if different.