I thought PSM didn’t support dynamic operations such as Intercomm_create - yes? The PSM security key wouldn’t match between the two jobs, and so there is no way for them to communicate.
Which is why I thought PSM can’t be used for dynamic operations at all, including comm_spawn and connect/accept > On Nov 11, 2014, at 2:13 PM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) <jsquy...@cisco.com> > wrote: > > On Nov 11, 2014, at 4:56 PM, Friedley, Andrew <andrew.fried...@intel.com> > wrote: > >> OK, I'm able to reproduce this now, not sure why I couldn't before. I took >> a look at the diff of the PSM MTL from 1.6.5 to 1.8.1, and nothing is >> standing out to me. >> >> Question more for the general group: Did anything related to the >> behavior/usage of MTL add_procs() change in this time window? > > The time between the 1.6.x series and the 1.8.x series is measure in terms of > a year or two, so, ya, something might have changed... > >> More particularly, it looks like add_procs is being called a second time >> during MPI_Intercomm_create and being passed a process that is already >> connected (passed into the first add_procs call). Is that right? Should >> the MTL handle multiple add_procs calls with the same proc provided? > > I'm afraid I don't know much about the MTL interface. > > George / Nathan? > > -- > 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 > Subscription: http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel > Link to this post: > http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/devel/2014/11/16294.php
