Both. It originally meant we need to get the fix out ASAP. Follow-up
e-mail (Louis sent privately to me, I responded just now to the users
list to publish/archive the info) suggests that our fixes don't fix his
problem. So, the fixes are insufficient, or he's encountering a
different problem
Hi all,
I'm trying to implement a method to pause all BTL's sending packets to
their destinations.
Currently I added a state variable to orte_process_info which will be
changed with an external program through process_commands() in
orte/orted/orted_comm.c (I hope it's processed globaly not l
...just catching up after the holidays...
Just to ensure I understand: does this mean that the sm issue is *not* yet
resolved? Or does it mean that it *is* resolved on the 1.4 branch and we need
to get 1.4.1 out ASAP?
On Jan 4, 2010, at 10:17 AM, Eugene Loh wrote:
> Open MPI wrote:
>
> >#2
Hi list,
I'm currently playing with thread levels in Open MPI and I'm quite
surprised by the current code.
First, the C interface :
at ompi/mpi/c/init_thread.c:56 we have :
#if OPAL_ENABLE_MPI_THREADS
*provided = MPI_THREAD_MULTIPLE;
#else
*provided = MPI_THREAD_SINGLE;
#endif
prior to
This only happens when the orte_forward_job_control MCA flag is set to 1
and the default is that it is set to 0. Which I believe meets Ralph's
criteria below.
--td
Ralph Castain wrote:
I don't have any issue with this so long as (a) it is -only- active when
someone sets a specific MCA param
I don't have any issue with this so long as (a) it is -only- active when
someone sets a specific MCA param requesting it, and (b) that flag is -not- set
by default.
On Jan 4, 2010, at 11:50 AM, Iain Bason wrote:
> WHAT: Enhance the orte_forward_job_control MCA flag by:
>
> 1. Forwarding sign
