Were these supposed to cover the time required for pinning and
unpinning?
Can you explain why you think they're unnecessary?
On Feb 12, 2008, at 5:27 AM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
Hi,
I am planning to commit the following patch. Those two progress()
calls
are responsible for most of our deep recursion troubles. And I also
think they are completely unnecessary.
diff --git a/ompi/mca/pml/ob1/pml_ob1_recvreq.c b/ompi/mca/pml/ob1/
pml_ob1_recvreq.c
index 5899243..641176e 100644
--- a/ompi/mca/pml/ob1/pml_ob1_recvreq.c
+++ b/ompi/mca/pml/ob1/pml_ob1_recvreq.c
@@ -704,9 +704,6 @@ int mca_pml_ob1_recv_request_schedule_once(
mca_bml_base_free(bml_btl,dst);
continue;
}
-
- /* run progress as the prepare (pinning) can take some time
*/
- mca_bml.bml_progress();
}
return OMPI_SUCCESS;
diff --git a/ompi/mca/pml/ob1/pml_ob1_sendreq.c b/ompi/mca/pml/ob1/
pml_ob1_sendreq.c
index 0998a05..9d7f3f9 100644
--- a/ompi/mca/pml/ob1/pml_ob1_sendreq.c
+++ b/ompi/mca/pml/ob1/pml_ob1_sendreq.c
@@ -968,7 +968,6 @@ cannot_pack:
mca_bml_base_free(bml_btl,des);
continue;
}
- mca_bml.bml_progress();
}
return OMPI_SUCCESS;
--
Gleb.
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
de...@open-mpi.org
http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
--
Jeff Squyres
Cisco Systems
