Hi,
With respect to "master" branch, from which commit is v2.0.1 branched off ?
Please let me know.
Thanks,
- Sreenidhi.
On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 2:59 AM, r...@open-mpi.org wrote:
> Hello folks
>
> Dunno where the head-honcho’s are hiding, but per their request: the newest
> v2.0.1 release cand
(jsquyres)
wrote:
> On Jul 27, 2016, at 7:32 AM, Sreenidhi Bharathkar Ramesh
> wrote:
>>
>> hi Jeff,
>>
>> This is interesting topic. Just FYI, we were thinking of evaluating
>> threading performance using the following:
>> http://www.mcs.anl.gov/~thakur
hi Howard,
Was this issue resolved ? If so, what is the solution ?
Please let me know.
Curious to know , since we are also experimenting with these limits.
Thanks,
- Sreenidhi.
On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 10:50 AM, Gilles Gouaillardet
wrote:
> Howard,
>
>
> did you bump both btl_tcp_rndv_eager_l
My mistake.
Looks like "--disable-smp-locks" is no longer available in 2.0.x versions.
Thanks,
- Sreenidhi.
-Original Message-----
From: Sreenidhi Bharathkar Ramesh
[mailto:sreenidhi-bharathkar.ram...@broadcom.com]
Sent: Tuesday, 12 July, 2016 11:32 AM
To: 'Open MPI Develope
[ query regarding an old thread ]
Hi,
It looks like "--disable-smp-locks" is still available as an option.
1. Will this be continued or deprecated ?
2. Under what circumstances would "--disable-smp-locks" be useful ?
In our experiments on ARM64 platform, it was seen that OSU Micro collective
be
om/open-mpi/ompi/pull/1634 and let me know if it works
> for you. Additional contributions are greatly appreciated!
> >>
> >> -Nathan
> >>
> >> On May 30, 2016, at 4:32 AM, Sreenidhi Bharathkar Ramesh <
> sreenidhi-bharathkar.ram...@broadcom.com>
Hello,
We may be in a position to contribute to Open MPI, initially by adding
ARM64 support. Specifically, atomics and Timer support.
I have already gone through:
https://www.open-mpi.org/community/contribute/
https://www.open-mpi.org/faq/?category=contributing
Please let me know:
1. baseline
Hi,
> - Improved support for MPI_THREAD_MULTIPLE (when configured with
--enable-mpi-thread-multiple).
Just curious to know why this is not enabled by default. Are there any
known issues ?
I was able to run HPCC benchmark with np=56, without any issues. Hence,
wondering.
Please let me know.
chnical reasons. If you plan to
> switch to the 2.x series, it might be easiest to just run a couple of tests
> and compare the performance for your application on your platform, and base
> your decision on that.
>
> Edgar
>
> On 5/10/2016 6:32 AM, Sreenidhi Bharathkar Ramesh wr
Hi,
1. During default build of OpenMPI, it looks like both ompio.la and romio.la
are built. Which I/O MCA library is used and based on what is the decision
taken ?
2. Are there any statistics available to compare these two - OMPIO vs ROMIO
?
I am using OpenMPI v1.10.1.
Thanks,
- Sreenidhi.
2:26 PM, Sreenidhi Bharathkar Ramesh <
sreenidhi-bharathkar.ram...@broadcom.com> wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> Thanks for the response, I understand.
>
> I have another question: why is any given operation implemented twice for
> the same architecture?
>
> Ref: opal/asm/base
sync functions always include a full memory fence
> while there are places where Open MPI only needs Acquire or Release. In
> that sense the use of the GCC builtin atomics is not always an
> "optimization".
>
> -Paul
>
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 4:19 AM, Sreenidhi Bharath
asm files need not be maintained.
Seems there is more of an advantage to have "--enable-builtin-atomics". Am
I missing something ? Please let me know your thoughts.
Thanks,
- Sreenidhi.
On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 10:33 AM, Sreenidhi Bharathkar Ramesh <
sreenidhi-bharathkar.ram...@broad
Hello,
With respect to atomic operations in assembly, I can see three source
files, for the same AMD64 architecture.
1. opal/asm/base/AMD64.asm
2. opal/include/opal/sys/amd64/atomic.h
3. opal/include/opal/sys/atomic_impl.h
What is the need for three files ? How are they inter-related ?
Please
14 matches
Mail list logo
