Open MPI logo

Hardware Locality Development Mailing List Archives

  |   Home   |   Support   |   FAQ   |   all Hardware Locality Development mailing list

Subject: Re: [hwloc-devel] v1.7
From: Brice Goglin (Brice.Goglin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-01-07 13:42:35

Le 07/01/2013 19:24, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) a écrit :
> On Jan 7, 2013, at 1:09 PM, Brice Goglin <Brice.Goglin_at_[hidden]>
> wrote:
>> Your argument works for selecting among I/O components like
>> cuda/nvml/opencl that are all independent (like several components in
>> the same framework in OMPI). But it doesn't work when the order matters
>> between components that discover the same things. Like "I want x86 first
>> because it works better than the solaris component on my machine, and
>> then the other usual components for to discover everything else".
>> Remember that HWLOC_COMPONENTS="foo" means "foo first and then all the
>> usual ones that do not conflict". It's not "only foo", which should be
>> written as "foo,stop" (should be rare since the core excludes all
>> conflicting components automatically).
> Gotcha. I missed those two subtleties:
> 1. order matters
> 2. there's an implicit "...and all the rest" at the end of the specification
> BTW, don't get me wrong -- I'm not against a different meaning than OMPI's. I was just trying to explain what OMPI uses an why.
> But that being said, having a "...and all the rest" implicitly implied at the end of the COMPONENTS specification is a little surprising (to me, IMHO). Perhaps you could have a special token that means "...and all the rest"? Perhaps:
> COMPONENTS=foo,bar,*

My first code did that (with "all" instead of "*" because come shells
don't like * :)
But my testing told me that there were many more cases where we want
everything ("all") than nothing else ("stop"), so changed to "nothing else".
But users are not going to play with the list of components very often
anyway, so I think that'd be ok too.