Hello everyone,
During the weekly meeting today, I proposed that we stop labeling bugs as
blockers for the 5.0.0 release which was seconded with the exception of data
corruption bugs. In the interest of having 5.0.0 released, we must put a hard
stop on diagnosing and ingesting bug fixes. We can
)?
- silently ignore the CUDA related components?
I guess this should be configurable by yet an other MCA parameter, but that
begs the question of what should be the default value for this parameter.
Cheers,
Gilles
On Sat, Sep 10, 2022 at 6:25 AM Zhang, William via devel
mailto:devel@lists.open
Hello interested parties,
As part of the work for the accelerator framework, the non standard behavior of
the existing cuda code in Open MPI is being reworked. One of the proposed
changes involves a change to the behavior of linking/compiling cuda components.
Currently, cuda functions are loade
Hello Masoud,
Responded inline
Thanks,
William
From: devel on behalf of Masoud Hemmatpour
via devel
Reply-To: Open MPI Developers
Date: Wednesday, April 20, 2022 at 5:29 AM
To: Open MPI Developers
Cc: Masoud Hemmatpour
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [OMPI devel] RDMA and OMPI implementation
CAUTION
Hello everyone,
Please review the new collectives tuned defaults:
https://github.com/open-mpi/ompi/pull/7730 as soon as possible. This patch will
affect most users and adds significant performance improvements for collective
operations.
Thanks,
William Zhang
From: "Zhang, William"
Date: Tues
Hello everyone,
I have created a PR for the new collectives defaults. Please review this so it
can be merged before the 5.0 branch.
Thanks,
William Zhang
From: "Zhang, William"
Date: Monday, May 11, 2020 at 1:06 AM
To: Marco Atzeri via devel
Subject: Average collective result graphs
Hello e
Hello everyone,
I have aggregated and averaged the results from the everyone who submitted data
for collective runs. You can view the graphs here if you’re interested:
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1MV5E9gN-5tootoWoh62aoXmN0jiWiqh3
Algorithm 0 represents the current defaults. I will refer to
Hello all,
With our new branch date of May 14th, in order to have any chance of merging
these changes, I will cut a PR on Monday morning, May 11th. This means I will
have to set a cutoff for data collection ideally by May 8th, Friday.
Please submit this data by then if you want to be considered
Hello all,
I have created a —with-slurm option when running (See updated README). In order
to set new defaults for collective algorithms, we will need data from those who
wish to provide it. We have created the following package that allows for
collecting data: https://github.com/open-mpi/ompi-
Hello all,
In order to set new defaults for collective algorithms, we will need data from
those who wish to provide it. We have created the following package that allows
for collecting data: https://github.com/open-mpi/ompi-collectives-tuning
Please run the package as soon as possible. Dependin
Hello,
We need reviews for https://github.com/open-mpi/ompi/pull/7582 which is a 5.0
blocker. Particularly, @artpol84 @karasevb please review this. We need to
ensure it doesn't break the UCX PML.
Thanks,
William Zhang
Hello,
We're getting the topology info using the opal_hwloc_topology object, we won't
be doing our own discovery.
William
On 3/17/20, 11:54 PM, "devel on behalf of Ralph Castain via devel"
wrote:
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not
click links or ope
Hello devel,
Can I get a review (not from Brian) for this patch:
https://github.com/open-mpi/ompi/pull/7134
These PR’s fix common matching bugs that users utilizing the tcp btl encounter.
It has been proven to fix issue https://github.com/open-mpi/ompi/issues/7115 –
it’s also the first utiliza
at instead they will prevent each other from functioning
efficiently.
George.
On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 2:36 PM Zhang, William via devel
mailto:devel@lists.open-mpi.org>> wrote:
Hello devel,
Thanks George for reviewing: https://github.com/open-mpi/ompi/pull/7167
Can I get a review (not from
Hello devel,
Thanks George for reviewing: https://github.com/open-mpi/ompi/pull/7167
Can I get a review (not from Brian) for this patch as well:
https://github.com/open-mpi/ompi/pull/7134
These PR’s fix common matching bugs that users utilizing the tcp btl encounter.
It has been proven to fix
Hello devel,
Can someone (not Brian – he’s already reviewed it and this is a big enough
change that I’d like others in the community to provide feedback), review the
two patches https://github.com/open-mpi/ompi/pull/7167
https://github.com/open-mpi/ompi/pull/7167
These PR’s fix common matchi
Yes, my pull request at https://github.com/open-mpi/ompi/pull/7134 (Please
review it >=() is the first utilization of the Reachable framework. I’ve also
been doing small documentation adjustments to make the inputs more clear.
If you have any questions on my PR, please leave feedback in the comm
PI BTL TCP interface mapping review request
William,
You seem to have posted the same pull request twice?
From: devel On Behalf Of Zhang, William via
devel
Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2019 2:16 PM
To: devel@lists.open-mpi.org
Cc: Zhang, William
Subject: [OMPI devel] Open MPI BTL TCP interface ma
Hello devel,
Can somebody review these two patches before they get lost in the mires of
time? https://github.com/open-mpi/ompi/pull/7167
https://github.com/open-mpi/ompi/pull/7167
These PR’s fix some common issues with Open MPI TCP BTL
Thanks,
William Zhang
Hello devel,
Can someone (not Brian – since he has already reviewed the patches internally),
review the two patches https://github.com/open-mpi/ompi/pull/7167
https://github.com/open-mpi/ompi/pull/7167
These PR’s fix common matching bugs that users utilizing the tcp btl encounter.
It has bee
20 matches
Mail list logo
