I like this idea to.
On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 09:48:06AM -0700, Jeff Squyres wrote:
> On May 16, 2007, at 9:06 AM, Bert Wesarg wrote:
>
> >> The PLPA could still *use* libtopo (e.g., so that you can specify
> >> socket/core tuples to plpa-taskset(1)), but the implementation of the
> >> topology functionality would be logically separate (i.e., in a
> >> library that plpa_taskset links against).
> > Here I remember that I want to ask you, whether the sc_merge()
> > function
> > from the plpa-taskset code could possible moved as a new function
> > to the
> > topo api? Or better the whole parsing stuff could be exported by
> > the lib.
>
> Good question. I think it might be good to have the string parser in
> libtopo -- that way, we could actually have some tools on multiple
> OS's that accept a uniform syntax for topo specification.
>
> > So feel free to create this new project.
>
> I'll give others a little while to chime in with opinions. If we all
> agree that this is the way to go, I'll back out most of the code from
> plpa and move it over to a new library, then have PLPA simply invoke
> the functionality from the new library.
>
> --
> Jeff Squyres
> Cisco Systems
>
> _______________________________________________
> plpa-users mailing list
> plpa-users_at_[hidden]
> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/plpa-users
--
Gleb.
|
![[Flag]](../../../../../community/mirrors/flag-us.gif){kind=small}