I am putting it back.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Terry.Dontje_at_[hidden] [mailto:Terry.Dontje_at_[hidden]]
> Sent: Monday, March 31, 2008 2:59 PM
> To: Open MPI Developers
> Cc: Lenny Verkhovsky; Sharon Melamed
> Subject: Re: [OMPI devel] RMAPS rank_file component patch and
> modifications for review
> Jeff Squyres wrote:
> > On Mar 27, 2008, at 8:02 AM, Lenny Verkhovsky wrote:
> >>> - I don't think we can delete the MCA param ompi_paffinity_alone;
> >>> exists in the v1.2 series and has historical precedent.
> >> It will not be deleted,
> >> It will just use the same infrastructure ( slot_list parameter and
> >> opal_base functions ). It will be transparent for the user.
> >> User have 3 ways to setup it
> >> 1. mca opal_paffinity_alone 1
> >> This will set paffinity as it did before
> >> 2. mca opal_paffinity_slot_list "slot_list"
> >> Used to define slots that will be used for all ranks on all
> >> nodes.
> >> 3. mca rmaps_rank_file_path rankfile
> >> Assigning ranks to CPUs according to the file
> > I don't see the MCA parameter "mpi_paffinity_alone" anymore:
> > -----
> > [4:54] svbu-mpi:~/svn/ompi2 % ompi_info --param all all | grep
> > paffinity_alone
> > MCA opal: parameter "opal_paffinity_alone" (current
> > value: "0")
> > [4:54] svbu-mpi:~/svn/ompi2 %
> > -----
> > My point is that I don't think we should delete this parameter;
> > is historical precedence for it (and it has been documented on the
> > page for a long, long time). Perhaps it can now simply be a synonym
> > for opal_paffinity_alone (registered in the MPI layer, not opal).
> I agree with Jeff on the above. This would cause a lot of busy work
> our customers and internal setups.