Re: [OMPI devel] Revise paffinity method?

2009-05-08 Thread Brian Barrett
Jumping in late (travelling this morning). I think this is the right answer :). Brian -- Brian Barrett There is an art . . . to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss. On May 8, 2009, at 9:45, Ralph Castain wrote: I think that's the way to go then -

Re: [OMPI devel] Revise paffinity method?

2009-05-08 Thread Terry Dontje
Ralph Castain wrote: I think that's the way to go then - it also follows our "the user is always right - even when they are wrong" philosophy. I'll probably have to draw on others to help ensure that the paffinity modules all report appropriately. Yeah, that sounds like the right way to do i

Re: [OMPI devel] Revise paffinity method?

2009-05-08 Thread Ralph Castain
I think that's the way to go then - it also follows our "the user is always right - even when they are wrong" philosophy. I'll probably have to draw on others to help ensure that the paffinity modules all report appropriately. Think I have enough now to start on this - probably middle of ne

Re: [OMPI devel] Revise paffinity method?

2009-05-08 Thread Jeff Squyres
On May 8, 2009, at 10:32 AM, Ralph Castain wrote: Actually, I was wondering (hot tub thought for the night) if the paffinity system can't just tell us if the proc has been bound or not? That would remove the need for YAP (i.e., yet another param). Yes, it can. What it can't tell, though, is

Re: [OMPI devel] Revise paffinity method?

2009-05-08 Thread Ralph Castain
Actually, I was wondering (hot tub thought for the night) if the paffinity system can't just tell us if the proc has been bound or not? That would remove the need for YAP (i.e., yet another param). On May 8, 2009, at 8:25 AM, Jeff Squyres wrote: On May 8, 2009, at 6:35 AM, Terry Dontje wrot

Re: [OMPI devel] Revise paffinity method?

2009-05-08 Thread Jeff Squyres
On May 8, 2009, at 6:35 AM, Terry Dontje wrote: So in essence the user might set one parameter and depending on whether orted is being used to launch the job or not determines when the process binding happens (process launch vs MPI_Init time). In the case that one needs/wants to rely on a

Re: [OMPI devel] compile error on trunk

2009-05-08 Thread Edgar Gabriel
ok, forget about it, mea culpa. Rerunning autogen can work wonders :-) Edgar Gabriel wrote: I have currently a problem compiling the trunk. configure runs through correctly, but when starting make I get the following error: gabriel@salmon:~/ompi/trunk> make make: *** No rule to make target `

[OMPI devel] compile error on trunk

2009-05-08 Thread Edgar Gabriel
I have currently a problem compiling the trunk. configure runs through correctly, but when starting make I get the following error: gabriel@salmon:~/ompi/trunk> make make: *** No rule to make target `config/ompi_check_attributes.m4', needed by `Makefile.in'. Stop. svn up claims that I am at

Re: [OMPI devel] Revise paffinity method?

2009-05-08 Thread Terry Dontje
So in essence the user might set one parameter and depending on whether orted is being used to launch the job or not determines when the process binding happens (process launch vs MPI_Init time). In the case that one needs/wants to rely on a different launcher to bind then you don't specify th