Open MPI logo

Open MPI User's 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.

From: Jeff Squyres (jsquyres_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-04-23 12:53:19


On Apr 22, 2007, at 8:46 PM, Mostyn Lewis wrote:

> More information.
>
> --mca mpi_paffinity_alone 0

Can you describe how you're verifying that the process is actually
bound?

> May I ask I question about the code, which I scanned.
>
> I see in ompi/runtime/ompi_mpi_params.c you do a:
>
> mca_base_param_reg_int_name("mpi", "paffinity_alone",
> "If nonzero, assume that this job
> is the only (set of) process(es) r
> unning on each node and bind processes to processors, starting with
> processor ID 0",
> false, false,
> (int) ompi_mpi_paffinity_alone,
> &value);
> ompi_mpi_paffinity_alone = OPAL_INT_TO_BOOL(value);

You're right that we're not checking the return value here, which is
bad. However, this is a pretty stable portion of the code -- I would
be surprised if it is failing.

Have you stepped through this with a debugger to verify if it is
actually failing or not?

-- 
Jeff Squyres
Cisco Systems