I'm sure someone will object to a name, but the logic looks fine to me
On Feb 9, 2010, at 6:35 AM, Jeff Squyres wrote: > On Feb 9, 2010, at 4:34 AM, Ralph Castain wrote: > >>> While we're at it, why not call the option giving MPI_THREAD_MULTIPLE >>> support --enable-thread-multiple ? >> >> Makes sense to me. I agree with Brian that we need three options here. > > Ok, how about these: > > --enable-opal-progress-threads: enables progress thread machinery in opal > > --enable-opal-multi-thread: enables multi threaded machinery in opal > or perhaps --enable-opal-threads ? > > --enable-mpi-thread-multiple: enables the use of MPI_THREAD_MULTIPLE; > affects only the MPI layer > directly implies --enable-opal-multi-thread > > Deprecated options > --enable-mpi-threads: deprecated synonym for --enable-mpi-thread-multiple > --enable-progress-threads: deprecated synonym for > --enable-opal-progress-threads > > -- > Jeff Squyres > jsquy...@cisco.com > > For corporate legal information go to: > http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/ > > > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list > de...@open-mpi.org > http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
