Jeff Squyres wrote:
Eugene --
Can you CMR over anything that still needs to go to v1.3 for the sm
fixes?
#1962
I'll be filing a CMR to activate coll_sync later today.
(I admit I didn't pay close attention to see if everything is already
over there)
On Jul 2, 2009, at 8:06 AM, Jeff Squyres wrote:
On Jul 1, 2009, at 10:23 PM, Eugene Loh wrote:
> For the future, we have a two pronged plan:
I suspect the standard procedure is that we all look quickly at this
e-mail message, file appropriately, and then resume our normal lives.
Yes? Or, is such a plan put somehow into place?
I have time to allocate to this starting next week, but I then take
a week of vacation the week after.
> 1. Clean up the sm btl:
> 1a. Remove all dead code.
What do you mean here? (Possibly you mean getting rid of sm pending
sends if we implement 1b properly, but I'm not sure.)
You mentioned to Brian and me that there was a lot of "dead code"
(#if'ed out or otherwise will-never-be-used). If that's incorrect,
then forget this item.
> 1b. Resize free_list_max and fifo_size MCA params to effect good
> enough flow control.
> 1c. Possibly: convert from FIFO's to linked lists (for future
> maintenance purposes, not necessarily to fix problems).
Another idea is to have two kinds of FIFOs. One is just for returning
fragments. The other is for in-coming message fragments. It would
even
seem as though one would no longer need "free lists", but just use the
ack FIFO to manage fragments. (ALL of this is complicated by the fact
that we have two kinds of fragments, eager and max, but fortunately
those details can be pushed onto the sorry fool who'll be implementing
all this. I wonder who that'll be.)
Likely me and/or Brian.
