Tim -
Just to make sure I"m not losing it - if any of the "high speed"
networks is found between peers, tcp shouldn't be used between that
pair, right? I was pretty sure that's what the priority code did
now, but wanted to make sure I wasn't losing it ;).
Brian
Begin forwarded message:
Hello Galen,
Finally I've got some time to look through the new code.
I have couple of notes. In pml_ob1_rdma.c you try to merge
registrations in the number of places. The code looks like this:
btl_mpool->mpool_deregister(btl_mpool, reg);
btl_mpool->mpool_register(btl_mpool,
Thats correct. Not sure why TCP would have been used - unless IB
interfaces weren't up..
Brian Barrett wrote:
Tim -
Just to make sure I"m not losing it - if any of the "high speed"
networks is found between peers, tcp shouldn't be used between that
pair, right? I was pretty sure that's wh
Gleb Natapov wrote:
Hello Galen,
Finally I've got some time to look through the new code.
I have couple of notes. In pml_ob1_rdma.c you try to merge
registrations in the number of places. The code looks like this:
btl_mpool->mpool_deregister(btl_mpool, reg);
btl_mpool->mpool_register(bt
Gleb,
Gleb Natapov wrote:
Hello Galen,
Finally I've got some time to look through the new code.
I have couple of notes. In pml_ob1_rdma.c you try to merge
registrations in the number of places. The code looks like this:
btl_mpool->mpool_deregister(btl_mpool, reg);
btl_mpool->mpool_regis
Can anyone comment on this?
Original Message
Subject: OMPI mpif.h problems
List-Post: devel@lists.open-mpi.org
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2005 12:27:13 -0600
From: David R. (Chip) Kent IV
To: Tim S. Woodall
References: <20050914164817.gj2...@duckhorn.lanl.gov> <432857a8.3060...@lanl.g
I managed to find a number of problems with the mpif.h when I tried it on
a big application. It looks like a lot of key constants are not defined
in this file. So far, MPI_SEEK_SET, MPI_MODE_CREATE, MPI_MODE_WRONLY
have broken the build. I've added them to mpif.h as I find them so that
I can
Note that the recent change to the configure script(s) to use --with-mvapi
instead of --with-btl-mvapi are not complete. I've recently had to use both
to compile mvapi. This is causing a great deal of pain for external users.
Can someone please look at this?
