Open MPI logo

Open MPI Development Mailing List Archives

  |   Home   |   Support   |   FAQ   |   all Development mailing list

Subject: Re: [OMPI devel] RFC: usnic BTL MPI_T pvar scheme
From: Paul Hargrove (phhargrove_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-11-05 21:26:02

On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 6:00 PM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres)

> On Nov 5, 2013, at 2:54 PM, Paul Hargrove <phhargrove_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> > If this approach is to be adopted by other components (and perhaps other
> MPIs), then it would be important for the enumeration variable name to be
> derived in a UNIFORM way:
> > <framework>_<component>_SOMETHING
> > Without a fixed value for "SOMETHING" somebody will need to read sources
> (or documentation) to make the connection.
> This is a good point; we got a similar piece of feedback from the MPI
> tools group.
> How about naming the state variable "<framework>_<component>"? And then
> that will apply to all "<framework>_<component>*" pvars.

Hmm... not sure how that jives with "principle of least astonishment".
Other than that "_SOMETHING" == "" seems like a solution that totally
avoids the problems associated with words like "device" (which might imply
something about h/w architecture) or "instance" (with potential
implications regarding s/w architecture).

So, on balance: +0.9 (my other 0.1 goes to "_enum" for "principle of least


Paul H. Hargrove                          PHHargrove_at_[hidden]
Future Technologies Group
Computer and Data Sciences Department     Tel: +1-510-495-2352
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory     Fax: +1-510-486-6900