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
perfo
> 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 warn
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
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, a
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
>
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 (
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 spec
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: Ha
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 W
Durga,
You need a progress function if your BTL require explicit progress to drain
the network events. As you noticed, the TCP BTL lacks a progress function
because it has it's fd registered in the main eventbase and does not
require a specific progress call to send/recv data. Moreover, if your BT
fwiw
in a previous thread, Jeff Hammond explained this is why mpich is
relying on C89 instead of C99,
since C89 appears to be a subset of C++11.
Cheers,
Gilles
On 3/2/2016 1:02 AM, Nathan Hjelm wrote:
I will add to how crazy this is. The C standard has been very careful
to not break existin
Hello all
(As you might know), I am working on implementing a new BTL for a
proprietary fabric, and, taking the path of least effort, copying and
pasting code from various pre-implemented BTL as is appropriate for our
hardware. My question is: are there any guidance on which of the functions
must
I will add to how crazy this is. The C standard has been very careful
to not break existing code. For example the C99 boolean is _Bool not
bool because C reserves _[A-Z]* for its own use. This means a valid C89
program is a valid C99 and C11 program. It Look like this is not true in
C++.
-Nathan
Adrian,
About bitness, it is correctly set when MPI install successes
See https://mtt.open-mpi.org/index.php?do_redir or even your successful
install on x86_64
I suspect it is queried once the installation is successful, and I ll try
to have a look at it.
Cheers,
Gilles
On Tuesday, March 1, 20
I have seen it before but it was not reproducible. I have now two
segfaults in opal_fifo in today's MTT run on master and 2.x:
https://mtt.open-mpi.org/index.php?do_redir=2270
https://mtt.open-mpi.org/index.php?do_redir=2271
The thing that is strange about the MTT output is that MTT does not det
15 matches
Mail list logo
