Ralph H Castain wrote:
On 7/11/08 7:48 AM, "Terry Dontje" <terry.don...@sun.com> wrote:
Jeff Squyres wrote:
Check that -- Ralph and I talked more about #1383 and have come up
with a decent/better solution that a) is not wonky and b) does not
involve MCA parameter synonyms. We're working on it in an hg and will
put it back when done (probably within a business day or three).
So I think the MCA synonym stuff *isn't* needed for v1.3 after all.
I am not dead yet!!!
So, there was also the name change of pls_rsh_agent to plm_rsh_agent
because the pls's were sucked into plm's (or so I believe). Anyways,
this seems like another case to support synonyms. Also are there other
pls mca parameters that have had their names changed to plm?
I think you're opening a really ugly can of worms. How far back do you want
to go? v1.0? v0.1? We have a history of changing mca param names across
major releases, so trying to keep everything alive could well become a
nightmare.
I am only asking to be compatible with the last release (however that
might have an interpretation of inifinity :-). Seriously, though I
think we need to be very careful about renaming mca parameters because
this will screw production sites and ISV's which use scripts to launch
their apps. So a change could render their scripts useless (the
paffinity param is a perfect example of this).
I don't really want to promote keeping everything alive forever but in
cases where the only change is a 3-4 letter prefix it almost looks
random to people outside of the community.
I would hate to try and figure out all the changes - and what about the
params that simply have disappeared, or had their functionality absorbed by
some combination of other params?
So, I think if a functionality is not supported or the way you drive it
is completely different then I agree with you trying to support a round
peg to fit in a square hole is silly. But if the feature is one for one
except in name only then I think we need to ask ourselves if we really
want/need to drop the original name.
My head aches already... :-)
Take two aspirins...
--td
Ralph
--td
I think the MCA param synonyms and "deprecated" stuff is useful for
the future, but at this point, nothing in v1.3 would use it. So my
$0.02 is that we should leave it out.
On Jul 10, 2008, at 2:00 PM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) wrote:
K, will do. Note that it turns out that we did not yet solve the
mpi_paffinity_alone issue, but we're working on it. I'm working on
the IOF issue ATM; will return to mpi_paffinity_alone in a bit...
On Jul 10, 2008, at 1:56 PM, George Bosilca wrote:
I'm 100% with Brad on this. Please go ahead and include this feature
in the 1.3.
george.
On Jul 10, 2008, at 11:33 AM, Brad Benton wrote:
I think this is very reasonable to go ahead and include for 1.3. I
find that preferable to a 1.3-specific "wonky" workaround. Plus,
this sounds like something that is very good to have in general.
--brad
On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 8:49 PM, Jeff Squyres <jsquy...@cisco.com>
wrote:
v1.3 RMs: Due to some recent work, the MCA parameter
mpi_paffinity_alone disappeared -- it was moved and renamed to be
opal_paffinity_alone. This is Bad because we have a lot of
historical precent based on the MCA param name
"mpi_paffinity_alone" (FAQ, PPT presentations, e-mails on public
lists, etc.). So it needed to be restored for v1.3. I just
noticed that I hadn't opened a ticket on this -- sorry -- I opened
#1383 tonight.
For a variety of reasons described in the commit message r1383,
Lenny and I first decided that it would be best to fix this problem
by the functionality committed in r18770 (have the ability to find
out where an MCA parameter was set). This would allow us to
register two MCA params: mpi_paffinity_alone and
opal_paffinity_alone, and generally do the Right Thing (because we
could then tell if a user had set a value or whether it was a
default MCA param value). This functionality will also be useful
in the openib BTL, where there is a blend of MCA parameters and INI
file parameters.
However, after doing that, it seemed like only a few more steps to
implement an overall better solution: implement "synonyms" for MCA
parameters. I.e., register the name "mpi_paffinity_alone" as a
synonym for opal_paffinity_alone. Along the way, it was trivial to
add a "deprecated" flag for MCA parameters that we no longer want
to use anymore (this deprecated flag is also useful in the OB1 PML
and openib BTL).
So to fix a problem that needed to be fixed for v1.3 (restore the
MCA parameter "mpi_paffinity_alone"), I ended up implementing new
functionality.
Can this go into v1.3, or do we need to implement some kind of
alternate fix? (I admit to not having thought through what it
would take to fix without the new MCA parameter functionality -- it
might be kinda wonky)
--
Jeff Squyres
Cisco Systems
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
de...@open-mpi.org
http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
de...@open-mpi.org
http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
de...@open-mpi.org
http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
--
Jeff Squyres
Cisco Systems
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
de...@open-mpi.org
http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
de...@open-mpi.org
http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
de...@open-mpi.org
http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
