This may fix the issue for newer versions of libnuma (2.0.x), but it breaks it
for older versions (0.9.x -- which is what is shipped in RHEL4 and 5). I'm
thinking we're going to need a configure test for this. Sigh.
#$%#@% libnuma!!! :-(
On Feb 23, 2011, at 7:59 AM, rusra...@osl.iu.edu wro
It looks like the original OMPI HG mirror got corrupted. We upgraded the
version of mercurial that is used to maintain this mirror (i.e., inject new SVN
commits into the HG mirror) and re-created the mirror.
All appears to be working now:
http://www.open-mpi.org/hg/
The new, correct mirro
I was recently handed
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=480307
for which a kindly GCC expert attached the enclosed patch. Apparently
this only causes problems on 32-bit i686 machines, which could by why
it has gone undetected until now.
-- JF
--- openmpi-1.5/opal/config/opal_con
Thanks. I've applied the patch and will start the process of pushing it
to the next 1.5 release.
Brian
On 2/23/11 11:04 AM, "Jay Fenlason" wrote:
>I was recently handed
>https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=480307
>for which a kindly GCC expert attached the enclosed patch. Apparentl
If I understand correctly the assembly this change is not related to clobber,
but to the input register. Moreover, I don't think the patch is correct. More
to come...
george.
On Feb 23, 2011, at 16:54 , brbar...@osl.iu.edu wrote:
> Author: brbarret
> Date: 2011-02-23 16:54:07 EST (Wed, 23 F
Jay,
Thanks for the code. The code you pointed out is only used during configure, so
I don't think is that critical. However, we use similar code deep into our
voodoo assembly generation, for opal_atomic_add_32 and opal_atomic_sub_32.
So if I understand your statement the correct version of the
Or how about this version ? Here I use the + modifier and I don't put any
constraints on the input line.
static inline int32_t opal_atomic_add_32(volatile int32_t* v, int i)
{
int ret = i;
__asm__ __volatile__(
SMPLOCK "xaddl %1,%0"
: "+m" (*v),
George -
You're right, I misread the patch. I've run into the same issue with gcc
before, but not on x86.
Jay, can you point us to the original bug report? I couldn't figure out
how to get from the patch to the bug in your bugzilla.
Brian
On 2/23/11 2:57 PM, "George Bosilca" wrote:
>If I un
Ok, I think I have this one solved. It's a configury change, so it'll come in
tonight.
Thanks for reporting it.
On Feb 21, 2011, at 9:49 PM, Barrett, Brian W wrote:
> All -
>
> The trunk currently doesn't link with --enable-static --disable-shared on
> Linux. The problem is that the comp
Brian, this is the bug report -
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=679489
--Nysal
On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 3:45 AM, Barrett, Brian W wrote:
> George -
>
> You're right, I misread the patch. I've run into the same issue with gcc
> before, but not on x86.
>
> Jay, can you point us to the
10 matches
Mail list logo
