On Feb 10, 2012, at 1:00 PM, TERRY DONTJE wrote:
>> Should we add "virbr0" to the default value for [btl|oob]_tcp_if_exclude?
>>
> What happens to that value if you then set btl_tcp_if_exclude to some value
> on the mpirun command line?
It works just fine. I.e., if you
mpirun --mca btl_tcp_if_exclude lo,virbr0 ...
That works like a champ.
But per Ralph's question, I don't know how generic that name is. It *seems* to
be specific to a virtualization interface (I assume "virbr" = "virtual
bridge"), but I can't say that for sure.
> So this brings me to something that has annoyed me for a bit. It seems to me
> that maybe it would be nice to have a conf file that you can dump interface
> names to exclude but would not be interpreted as a btl_tcp_if_exclude
> options. For example there were some interfaces on certain Sun machine (a
> long time ago) that went to the diagnostic processor and caused a similar
> issue as the virbr0 issue. So we started delivering a conf file that set
> btl_tcp_if_exclude but then this precluded anyone from being able to set
> btl_tcp_if_include. If we had a file one could specify the set of interfaces
> to use or exclude but allow the user to operate on the result of that set it
> seems that would be nice.
I'm not sure what you're saying. CLI always overrides config files...?
--
Jeff Squyres
[email protected]
For corporate legal information go to:
http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/
