On Feb 28, 2012, at 6:40 PM, Paul H. Hargrove wrote: > Testing 1.5.5rc3 on a "representative sampling" of my many platforms looks > good. > In particular, I've retested various platforms that showed any significant > problems previously and found them to be fixed. > > Though minor, I do see that the following patches I've posted are not applied > + Add a Mellanox PCI vendor ID to the device params file > http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/devel/2012/02/10615.php > Posted 13 hours ago and not yet on trunk
Just pinged Mellanox for confirmation. I see no reason to do this, but it is their hardware, so I want them in the loop. > + Fix show_help_lex.l to avoid undefined behavior (and silence associated > warning from flex) > http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/devel/2012/02/10521.php > Was applied to trunk as r25983 Pushed this to v1.6 (because we know that the trailing context is ok in all OMPI cases): CMR #3025. > + Reorder includes to avoid "'struct in_addr' declared inside parameter list" > warnings > http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/devel/2012/02/10484.php > Was applied to trunk as r25984 Pushed this to v1.6: CMR #3026. > I am assuming there is no interest in the MIPS atomics fixes, or the PPC64 > atomics work-around for an XLC bug. > MIPS 1of2: http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/devel/2012/02/10416.php > MIPS 2of2: http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/devel/2012/02/10417.php > PPC64/XLC: http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/devel/2012/02/10603.php > If there *is* interest in these, let me know if there is any assistance I can > lend. There actually is, but I'm ok pushing all of these to v1.6. I'll file tickets for v1.6. So far as I see it, there's just the 1 issue of the Mellanox device ID. Which, honestly, I'm ok pushing to v1.6 because it's for fairly old Mellanox hardware -- that ID is already in the ConnectX entry. -- Jeff Squyres jsquy...@cisco.com For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/
