Re: [OMPI devel] RFC: warn if running a debug build

[Mark Santcroos]

> On 02 Mar 2016, at 14:54 , Ralph Castain  wrote:
> * remove the enable-debug-by-default logic

Given that it currently depends whether your VPATH is inside or outside the 
source tree, I think that is the only consistent decision :)

Re: [OMPI devel] RFC: warn if running a debug build

[Gilles Gouaillardet]

On Wednesday, March 2, 2016, Ralph Castain  wrote:

> Perhaps we can all meet in the middle:
>
> * remove the enable-debug-by-default logic
>
>
I have no strong opinion about that


> * have mpirun -version clearly state that it is a debug build and include
> Jeff’s warning about debug builds being used for performance testing
>

+1

I’m increasingly feeling that we shouldn’t output that message every time
> someone executes a debug-based operation, even if we add a param to turn
> off the warning.
>

+1



>
> On Mar 2, 2016, at 5:48 AM, Gilles Gouaillardet <
> gilles.gouaillar...@gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
> Ralph,
>
> that means that when a developer truse to reproduce exactly what an end
> user did, he/she will get a different behavior because only one of them is
> known. imho, that sounds a bit too crazy.
>
> what about an other approach :
> have mpirun --version (and MPI api if any) clearly state this is a debug
> build ?
> I mean a "serious" benchmark should list the third party libs and their
> versions, so that could be enough.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Gilles
>
> On Wednesday, March 2, 2016, Ralph Castain  > wrote:
>
>> What about this crazy idea? We already have .opal_unignore that looks at
>> the username. Well, what if we did the same thing here? Have autogen.pl
>> look at the username - if it is a known developer, then enable debug. If
>> not, then disable it.
>>
>> I am just concerned that we are going to spend a bunch of time responding
>> to annoyed/concerned users about this warning. Every time we ask someone to
>> run a debug build to diagnose a problem, or someone builds a debug build
>> for their own diagnostic purposes, they are going to get an unnecessary
>> warning. We already have had to contend with the annoyed users dealing with
>> auto-binding because we are trying to respond to the benchmarkers who
>> refuse to make an effort to compare apples to apples - I would advise
>> against extending that practice.
>>
>> I personally don’t mind having to explicitly enable-debug as I build from
>> a platform file, but making it more convenient for those developers who
>> don’t would be nice.
>>
>> > On Mar 2, 2016, at 4:51 AM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > On Mar 2, 2016, at 6:30 AM, Mark Santcroos 
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> On 02 Mar 2016, at 5:06 , Gilles Gouaillardet 
>> wrote:
>> >>> what about *not* issuing this warning if OpenMPI is built from git ?
>> >>> that would be friendlier for OMPI developers,
>> >>> and should basically *not* affect endusers, since they would rather
>> build OMPI from a tarball.
>> >>
>> >> VPATH builds aren't debug builds by default, or are they?
>> >
>> > Correct -- VPATH builds are *not* debug-by-default builds.
>> >
>> > Just to be clear: the debug-by-default builds are activated when a .git
>> directory is seen in the build directory.  This is for people who git clone
>> and do a non-VPATH build.  Such people are typically developers.
>> >
>> > And just to make *that* more clear: building from a tarball will not
>> have a .git directory, so you get an optimized build by default.
>> >
>> > --
>> > 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/2016/03/18664.php
>>
>> ___
>> 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/2016/03/18665.php
>
> ___
> 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/2016/03/18666.php
>
>
>

Re: [OMPI devel] RFC: warn if running a debug build

[Ralph Castain]

Perhaps we can all meet in the middle:

* remove the enable-debug-by-default logic

* have mpirun -version clearly state that it is a debug build and include 
Jeff’s warning about debug builds being used for performance testing

I’m increasingly feeling that we shouldn’t output that message every time 
someone executes a debug-based operation, even if we add a param to turn off 
the warning.


> On Mar 2, 2016, at 5:48 AM, Gilles Gouaillardet 
>  wrote:
> 
> Ralph,
> 
> that means that when a developer truse to reproduce exactly what an end user 
> did, he/she will get a different behavior because only one of them is known. 
> imho, that sounds a bit too crazy.
> 
> what about an other approach :
> have mpirun --version (and MPI api if any) clearly state this is a debug 
> build ?
> I mean a "serious" benchmark should list the third party libs and their 
> versions, so that could be enough.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Gilles
> 
> On Wednesday, March 2, 2016, Ralph Castain  > wrote:
> What about this crazy idea? We already have .opal_unignore that looks at the 
> username. Well, what if we did the same thing here? Have autogen.pl 
>  look at the username - if it is a known developer, then 
> enable debug. If not, then disable it.
> 
> I am just concerned that we are going to spend a bunch of time responding to 
> annoyed/concerned users about this warning. Every time we ask someone to run 
> a debug build to diagnose a problem, or someone builds a debug build for 
> their own diagnostic purposes, they are going to get an unnecessary warning. 
> We already have had to contend with the annoyed users dealing with 
> auto-binding because we are trying to respond to the benchmarkers who refuse 
> to make an effort to compare apples to apples - I would advise against 
> extending that practice.
> 
> I personally don’t mind having to explicitly enable-debug as I build from a 
> platform file, but making it more convenient for those developers who don’t 
> would be nice.
> 
> > On Mar 2, 2016, at 4:51 AM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres)  > > wrote:
> >
> > On Mar 2, 2016, at 6:30 AM, Mark Santcroos  > > wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 02 Mar 2016, at 5:06 , Gilles Gouaillardet  >>> > wrote:
> >>> what about *not* issuing this warning if OpenMPI is built from git ?
> >>> that would be friendlier for OMPI developers,
> >>> and should basically *not* affect endusers, since they would rather build 
> >>> OMPI from a tarball.
> >>
> >> VPATH builds aren't debug builds by default, or are they?
> >
> > Correct -- VPATH builds are *not* debug-by-default builds.
> >
> > Just to be clear: the debug-by-default builds are activated when a .git 
> > directory is seen in the build directory.  This is for people who git clone 
> > and do a non-VPATH build.  Such people are typically developers.
> >
> > And just to make *that* more clear: building from a tarball will not have a 
> > .git directory, so you get an optimized build by default.
> >
> > --
> > 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/2016/03/18664.php 
> > 
> 
> ___
> 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/2016/03/18665.php 
> ___
> 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/2016/03/18666.php

Re: [OMPI devel] RFC: warn if running a debug build

[Gilles Gouaillardet]

Ralph,

that means that when a developer truse to reproduce exactly what an end
user did, he/she will get a different behavior because only one of them is
known. imho, that sounds a bit too crazy.

what about an other approach :
have mpirun --version (and MPI api if any) clearly state this is a debug
build ?
I mean a "serious" benchmark should list the third party libs and their
versions, so that could be enough.

Cheers,

Gilles

On Wednesday, March 2, 2016, Ralph Castain  wrote:

> What about this crazy idea? We already have .opal_unignore that looks at
> the username. Well, what if we did the same thing here? Have autogen.pl
> look at the username - if it is a known developer, then enable debug. If
> not, then disable it.
>
> I am just concerned that we are going to spend a bunch of time responding
> to annoyed/concerned users about this warning. Every time we ask someone to
> run a debug build to diagnose a problem, or someone builds a debug build
> for their own diagnostic purposes, they are going to get an unnecessary
> warning. We already have had to contend with the annoyed users dealing with
> auto-binding because we are trying to respond to the benchmarkers who
> refuse to make an effort to compare apples to apples - I would advise
> against extending that practice.
>
> I personally don’t mind having to explicitly enable-debug as I build from
> a platform file, but making it more convenient for those developers who
> don’t would be nice.
>
> > On Mar 2, 2016, at 4:51 AM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres)  > wrote:
> >
> > On Mar 2, 2016, at 6:30 AM, Mark Santcroos  > wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 02 Mar 2016, at 5:06 , Gilles Gouaillardet  > wrote:
> >>> what about *not* issuing this warning if OpenMPI is built from git ?
> >>> that would be friendlier for OMPI developers,
> >>> and should basically *not* affect endusers, since they would rather
> build OMPI from a tarball.
> >>
> >> VPATH builds aren't debug builds by default, or are they?
> >
> > Correct -- VPATH builds are *not* debug-by-default builds.
> >
> > Just to be clear: the debug-by-default builds are activated when a .git
> directory is seen in the build directory.  This is for people who git clone
> and do a non-VPATH build.  Such people are typically developers.
> >
> > And just to make *that* more clear: building from a tarball will not
> have a .git directory, so you get an optimized build by default.
> >
> > --
> > 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/2016/03/18664.php
>
> ___
> 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/2016/03/18665.php

Re: [OMPI devel] RFC: warn if running a debug build

[Ralph Castain]

What about this crazy idea? We already have .opal_unignore that looks at the 
username. Well, what if we did the same thing here? Have autogen.pl look at the 
username - if it is a known developer, then enable debug. If not, then disable 
it.

I am just concerned that we are going to spend a bunch of time responding to 
annoyed/concerned users about this warning. Every time we ask someone to run a 
debug build to diagnose a problem, or someone builds a debug build for their 
own diagnostic purposes, they are going to get an unnecessary warning. We 
already have had to contend with the annoyed users dealing with auto-binding 
because we are trying to respond to the benchmarkers who refuse to make an 
effort to compare apples to apples - I would advise against extending that 
practice.

I personally don’t mind having to explicitly enable-debug as I build from a 
platform file, but making it more convenient for those developers who don’t 
would be nice.

> On Mar 2, 2016, at 4:51 AM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres)  
> wrote:
> 
> On Mar 2, 2016, at 6:30 AM, Mark Santcroos  wrote:
>> 
>>> On 02 Mar 2016, at 5:06 , Gilles Gouaillardet  wrote:
>>> what about *not* issuing this warning if OpenMPI is built from git ?
>>> that would be friendlier for OMPI developers,
>>> and should basically *not* affect endusers, since they would rather build 
>>> OMPI from a tarball.
>> 
>> VPATH builds aren't debug builds by default, or are they?
> 
> Correct -- VPATH builds are *not* debug-by-default builds.
> 
> Just to be clear: the debug-by-default builds are activated when a .git 
> directory is seen in the build directory.  This is for people who git clone 
> and do a non-VPATH build.  Such people are typically developers.
> 
> And just to make *that* more clear: building from a tarball will not have a 
> .git directory, so you get an optimized build by default.
> 
> -- 
> 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/2016/03/18664.php

Re: [OMPI devel] RFC: warn if running a debug build

[Jeff Squyres (jsquyres)]

On Mar 2, 2016, at 6:30 AM, Mark Santcroos  wrote:
> 
>> On 02 Mar 2016, at 5:06 , Gilles Gouaillardet  wrote:
>> what about *not* issuing this warning if OpenMPI is built from git ?
>> that would be friendlier for OMPI developers,
>> and should basically *not* affect endusers, since they would rather build 
>> OMPI from a tarball.
> 
> VPATH builds aren't debug builds by default, or are they?

Correct -- VPATH builds are *not* debug-by-default builds.

Just to be clear: the debug-by-default builds are activated when a .git 
directory is seen in the build directory.  This is for people who git clone and 
do a non-VPATH build.  Such people are typically developers.

And just to make *that* more clear: building from a tarball will not have a 
.git directory, so you get an optimized build by default.

-- 
Jeff Squyres
jsquy...@cisco.com
For corporate legal information go to: 
http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/

Re: [OMPI devel] RFC: warn if running a debug build

[Mark Santcroos]

> On 02 Mar 2016, at 5:06 , Gilles Gouaillardet  wrote:
> what about *not* issuing this warning if OpenMPI is built from git ?
> that would be friendlier for OMPI developers,
> and should basically *not* affect endusers, since they would rather build 
> OMPI from a tarball.

VPATH builds aren't debug builds by default, or are they?
(I'm somewhat assuming that quite some developers use these.)

Re: [OMPI devel] RFC: warn if running a debug build

[Jeff Squyres (jsquyres)]

On Mar 2, 2016, at 6:20 AM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres)  wrote:
> 
> Yes, we did.  But that hasn't happened yet.  I don't remember who was 
> supposed to do that, offhand.  If we decide that disabling debug builds by 
> default is a better approach than this one, no problem.  To me, they seem 
> like complimentary ideas -- especially if debug builds are not the default, 
> then it will be unusual to have debug builds, and therefore an extra warning 
> is a not necessarily a bad thing.

I added a 2nd commit to the PR that disables debug-build-by-default behavior if 
a .git directory is found.

-- 
Jeff Squyres
jsquy...@cisco.com
For corporate legal information go to: 
http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/

Re: [OMPI devel] RFC: warn if running a debug build

[Jeff Squyres (jsquyres)]

On Mar 2, 2016, at 1:02 AM, George Bosilca  wrote:
> 
> I am not sure why Jeff decided to implement this approach. If I remember 
> correctly last week we converged toward the solution described by Ralph (ie 
> disabling the debug build by default for everyone,  including developers).

Yes, we did.  But that hasn't happened yet.  I don't remember who was supposed 
to do that, offhand.  If we decide that disabling debug builds by default is a 
better approach than this one, no problem.  To me, they seem like complimentary 
ideas -- especially if debug builds are not the default, then it will be 
unusual to have debug builds, and therefore an extra warning is a not 
necessarily a bad thing.

Here's the message that is emitted from 
https://github.com/open-mpi/ompi/pull/1417:

# OPEN MPI: This is a debug build. DO NOT USE IT FOR PERFORMANCE RESULTS!
# OPEN MPI: Set MCA param "orte_nowarn_debug_build" to disable this msg

I didn't state it in the message, but you can also "mpirun 
--nowarn-debug-build" -- I only listed the thing you'd put in your environment 
to disable it just because that seemed like a more common thing to do.

> I wish we could fix all the cases. What we tried to achieve is to prevent the 
> most usual blunders, but without finding the perfect solution. Most of the 
> solutions we came up with put the burden on us, the OMPI developers.

+1

-- 
Jeff Squyres
jsquy...@cisco.com
For corporate legal information go to: 
http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/

Re: [OMPI devel] RFC: warn if running a debug build

[George Bosilca]

I am not sure why Jeff decided to implement this approach. If I remember
correctly last week we converged toward the solution described by Ralph (ie
disabling the debug build by default for everyone,  including developers).

I wish we could fix all the cases. What we tried to achieve is to prevent
the most usual blunders, but without finding the perfect solution. Most of
the solutions we came up with put the burden on us,  the OMPI developers.

George
On Mar 1, 2016 10:51 PM, "Gilles Gouaillardet"  wrote:

> Let me rephrase that.
>
> i will set the parameter in the etc/openmpi-mca-params.conf of my install
> directory,
> and i will very likely forget about it (etc/openmpi-mca-params.conf is not
> overwritten by make install, right ?)
>
> if one day, i decide to configure without --enable-debug and run a
> performance benchmark, then i will not get the warning i need (and yes, i
> will be the only one to blame ... but isn't it something we want to avoid
> here ?)
>
> Cheers,
>
> Gilles
>
> On 3/2/2016 1:43 PM, George Bosilca wrote:
>
>> On Mar 1, 2016, at 22:27 , Gilles Gouaillardet  wrote:
>>>
>>> be "me-friendly" :-)
>>> i explicitly configure with --enable-debug --enable-picky from git, so i
>>> (hopefully) know what i am doing and do not want any warning.
>>>
>>> iirc, cisco mtt does that too, and i am not sure you would want a
>>> warning and/or update your mtt config.
>>>
>>> this is not a strong opinion, and i am fine with setting a parameter (i
>>> will likely soon forget i set that) in a config file.
>>>
>> And you will be painfully reminded about that ;)
>>
>> The emitted message was supposed to contain the MCA parameter that need
>> to be set to silence the warning.
>>
>>George.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Gilles
>>>
>>> On 3/2/2016 1:21 PM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) wrote:
>>>
 On Mar 1, 2016, at 10:17 PM, Gilles Gouaillardet 
 wrote:

> In this case, should we only display the warning if debug build was
> implicit ?
> for example, ./configure from git would display the warning (implicit
> debug),
> but ./configure --enable-debug would not (explicit debug), regardless
> we built from git or a tarball
>
 We don't currently distinguish between these two cases.

 What is the rationale for only warning on implicit debug builds?

 ___
>>> 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/2016/03/18656.php
>>>
>> ___
>> 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/2016/03/18658.php
>>
>>
> ___
> 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/2016/03/18659.php
>

Re: [OMPI devel] RFC: warn if running a debug build

[Gilles Gouaillardet]

Let me rephrase that.

i will set the parameter in the etc/openmpi-mca-params.conf of my 
install directory,
and i will very likely forget about it (etc/openmpi-mca-params.conf is 
not overwritten by make install, right ?)


if one day, i decide to configure without --enable-debug and run a 
performance benchmark, then i will not get the warning i need (and yes, 
i will be the only one to blame ... but isn't it something we want to 
avoid here ?)


Cheers,

Gilles

On 3/2/2016 1:43 PM, George Bosilca wrote:

On Mar 1, 2016, at 22:27 , Gilles Gouaillardet  wrote:

be "me-friendly" :-)
i explicitly configure with --enable-debug --enable-picky from git, so i 
(hopefully) know what i am doing and do not want any warning.

iirc, cisco mtt does that too, and i am not sure you would want a warning 
and/or update your mtt config.

this is not a strong opinion, and i am fine with setting a parameter (i will 
likely soon forget i set that) in a config file.

And you will be painfully reminded about that ;)

The emitted message was supposed to contain the MCA parameter that need to be 
set to silence the warning.

   George.


Cheers,

Gilles

On 3/2/2016 1:21 PM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) wrote:

On Mar 1, 2016, at 10:17 PM, Gilles Gouaillardet  wrote:

In this case, should we only display the warning if debug build was implicit ?
for example, ./configure from git would display the warning (implicit debug),
but ./configure --enable-debug would not (explicit debug), regardless we built 
from git or a tarball

We don't currently distinguish between these two cases.

What is the rationale for only warning on implicit debug builds?


___
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/2016/03/18656.php

___
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/2016/03/18658.php

Re: [OMPI devel] RFC: warn if running a debug build

[George Bosilca]

> On Mar 1, 2016, at 22:27 , Gilles Gouaillardet  wrote:
> 
> be "me-friendly" :-)
> i explicitly configure with --enable-debug --enable-picky from git, so i 
> (hopefully) know what i am doing and do not want any warning.
> 
> iirc, cisco mtt does that too, and i am not sure you would want a warning 
> and/or update your mtt config.
> 
> this is not a strong opinion, and i am fine with setting a parameter (i will 
> likely soon forget i set that) in a config file.

And you will be painfully reminded about that ;)

The emitted message was supposed to contain the MCA parameter that need to be 
set to silence the warning.

  George.

> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Gilles
> 
> On 3/2/2016 1:21 PM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) wrote:
>> On Mar 1, 2016, at 10:17 PM, Gilles Gouaillardet  wrote:
>>> In this case, should we only display the warning if debug build was 
>>> implicit ?
>>> for example, ./configure from git would display the warning (implicit 
>>> debug),
>>> but ./configure --enable-debug would not (explicit debug), regardless we 
>>> built from git or a tarball
>> We don't currently distinguish between these two cases.
>> 
>> What is the rationale for only warning on implicit debug builds?
>> 
> 
> ___
> 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/2016/03/18656.php

Re: [OMPI devel] RFC: warn if running a debug build

[Ralph Castain]

I’ll bet we get a rash of complaints about this behavior…at the very least, 
let’s not do it if somebody deliberately asks for a debug build. I think people 
generally hate getting annoying warnings just because a few people do something 
wrong.


> On Mar 1, 2016, at 8:27 PM, Gilles Gouaillardet  wrote:
> 
> be "me-friendly" :-)
> i explicitly configure with --enable-debug --enable-picky from git, so i 
> (hopefully) know what i am doing and do not want any warning.
> 
> iirc, cisco mtt does that too, and i am not sure you would want a warning 
> and/or update your mtt config.
> 
> this is not a strong opinion, and i am fine with setting a parameter (i will 
> likely soon forget i set that) in a config file.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Gilles
> 
> On 3/2/2016 1:21 PM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) wrote:
>> On Mar 1, 2016, at 10:17 PM, Gilles Gouaillardet  wrote:
>>> In this case, should we only display the warning if debug build was 
>>> implicit ?
>>> for example, ./configure from git would display the warning (implicit 
>>> debug),
>>> but ./configure --enable-debug would not (explicit debug), regardless we 
>>> built from git or a tarball
>> We don't currently distinguish between these two cases.
>> 
>> What is the rationale for only warning on implicit debug builds?
>> 
> 
> ___
> 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/2016/03/18656.php

Re: [OMPI devel] RFC: warn if running a debug build

[Gilles Gouaillardet]

be "me-friendly" :-)
i explicitly configure with --enable-debug --enable-picky from git, so i 
(hopefully) know what i am doing and do not want any warning.


iirc, cisco mtt does that too, and i am not sure you would want a 
warning and/or update your mtt config.


this is not a strong opinion, and i am fine with setting a parameter (i 
will likely soon forget i set that) in a config file.


Cheers,

Gilles

On 3/2/2016 1:21 PM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) wrote:

On Mar 1, 2016, at 10:17 PM, Gilles Gouaillardet  wrote:

In this case, should we only display the warning if debug build was implicit ?
for example, ./configure from git would display the warning (implicit debug),
but ./configure --enable-debug would not (explicit debug), regardless we built 
from git or a tarball

We don't currently distinguish between these two cases.

What is the rationale for only warning on implicit debug builds?

Re: [OMPI devel] RFC: warn if running a debug build

[Jeff Squyres (jsquyres)]

On Mar 1, 2016, at 10:17 PM, Gilles Gouaillardet  wrote:
> 
> In this case, should we only display the warning if debug build was implicit ?
> for example, ./configure from git would display the warning (implicit debug),
> but ./configure --enable-debug would not (explicit debug), regardless we 
> built from git or a tarball

We don't currently distinguish between these two cases.

What is the rationale for only warning on implicit debug builds?

-- 
Jeff Squyres
jsquy...@cisco.com
For corporate legal information go to: 
http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/

Re: [OMPI devel] RFC: warn if running a debug build

[Gilles Gouaillardet]

In this case, should we only display the warning if debug build was 
implicit ?
for example, ./configure from git would display the warning (implicit 
debug),
but ./configure --enable-debug would not (explicit debug), regardless we 
built from git or a tarball



On 3/2/2016 1:13 PM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) wrote:

On Mar 1, 2016, at 10:06 PM, Gilles Gouaillardet  wrote:

what about *not* issuing this warning if OpenMPI is built from git ?
that would be friendlier for OMPI developers,
and should basically *not* affect endusers, since they would rather build OMPI 
from a tarball.

We're actually specifically trying to catch this case: someone builds from git, 
doesn't know (or care) that it's a debug build, and runs some performance tests 
with Open MPI.

We figured that it would be sufficient for OMPI devs to set the env variable in 
their shell startup files to avoid the message.

Re: [OMPI devel] RFC: warn if running a debug build

[Jeff Squyres (jsquyres)]

On Mar 1, 2016, at 10:06 PM, Gilles Gouaillardet  wrote:
> 
> what about *not* issuing this warning if OpenMPI is built from git ?
> that would be friendlier for OMPI developers,
> and should basically *not* affect endusers, since they would rather build 
> OMPI from a tarball.

We're actually specifically trying to catch this case: someone builds from git, 
doesn't know (or care) that it's a debug build, and runs some performance tests 
with Open MPI.

We figured that it would be sufficient for OMPI devs to set the env variable in 
their shell startup files to avoid the message.

-- 
Jeff Squyres
jsquy...@cisco.com
For corporate legal information go to: 
http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/

Re: [OMPI devel] RFC: warn if running a debug build

[Gilles Gouaillardet]

Jeff,

what about *not* issuing this warning if OpenMPI is built from git ?
that would be friendlier for OMPI developers,
and should basically *not* affect endusers, since they would rather 
build OMPI from a tarball.


Cheers,

Gilles

On 3/2/2016 1:00 PM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) wrote:

WHAT: Have orterun emit a brief warning when using a debug build.

WHY: So people stop trying to use a debug build for performance results.

WHERE: Mostly in orterun, but a little in orte/runtime

WHEN: No rush on this; the idea came up today at the MPI Forum.  We can discuss 
next Tuesday on the Webex.

MORE DETAIL:

https://github.com/open-mpi/ompi/pull/1417