Dear all,
I would like to report a bug for the CUDA support on the last 5 trunk
versions.
The attached code is a simply send/receive test case which correctly works
with version 1.9a1r27844.
Starting from version 1.9a1r27862 up to 1.9a1r27897 I get the following
message:
./test: symbol lookup err
Thanks for this report. I will look into this. Can you tell me what your
mpirun command looked like and do you know what transport you are running over?
Specifically, is this on a single node or multiple nodes?
Rolf
From: devel-boun...@open-mpi.org [mailto:devel-boun...@open-mpi.org] On Behalf
On 24/01/13 02:54, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) wrote:
[snip] Basic point is - this is an insufficiently validated patch
referred to as "an ugly kludge" by the original author (Jon
Masters@Red Hat), who created it to be able to include it in the
Fedora ARMv5 port. I has previously provided suggestions
I usually run "mpirun -np 2 ./test". I execute always on a single node. The
message appears either with 1 or 2 GPUs on the single node.
2013/1/24 Rolf vandeVaart
> Thanks for this report. I will look into this. Can you tell me what your
> mpirun command looked like and do you know what transp
Many thanks for the summary!
Can you file tickets about this stuff against 1.7? Included your patches, etc.
These are pretty obscure issues and I'm ok not fixing them in the 1.6 branch
(unless someone has a burning desire to get them fixed in 1.6).
But we should properly track and fix these
Jeff, George,
I've implemented George's idea for ticket #3123 "MPI-2.2: Ordering of
attribution deletion callbacks on MPI_COMM_SELF". See attached
delete-attr-order.patch.
It is implemented by creating a temporal array of ordered attribute_value_t
pointers at ompi_attr_delete_all() call using att
So 3 units of modularity at this stage - got it.
Thanks,
Rich
-Original Message-
From: devel-boun...@open-mpi.org [mailto:devel-boun...@open-mpi.org] On Behalf
Of Barrett, Brian W
Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2013 5:26 PM
To: Open MPI Developers
Subject: Re: [OMPI devel] [EXTERNAL] Re:
I was trying to figure out what the new interface provides. Is it supposed to
provide the ability to replace entire run-time functionality, does it increase
the modularity or the rte, or something else.
Thanks,
Rich
-Original Message-
From: devel-boun...@open-mpi.org [mailto:devel-boun
Cool - it doesn't actually increase modularity or anything. The goal wasn't to
generalize things very much, but rather to provide a way to use different
ORTE-like versions - e.g., if you want to use PMI without any of the rest of
the ORTE support, or if you want to attach a fault tolerant versio
http://fault-tolerance.org/
George.
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 5:10 PM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres)
wrote:
> On Jan 23, 2013, at 10:27 AM, George Bosilca wrote:
>
>> While we always strive to improve this functionality, it was available as a
>> separate software packages for quite some time.
>
> Wh
On Jan 24, 2013, at 8:18 AM, Leif Lindholm wrote:
> OK. In which case I probably _should_ be on that list.
> *cough* might I however suggest that a statement to that effect is added
> to http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/ompi.php ?
Fair point. Done.
>> I tested this patch in v1.6 and v1.
Jeff,
I've filed the ticket.
https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/ompi/ticket/3475
Thanks,
Takahiro Kawashima,
MPI development team,
Fujitsu
> Many thanks for the summary!
>
> Can you file tickets about this stuff against 1.7? Included your patches,
> etc.
>
> These are pretty obscure issues and I
12 matches
Mail list logo
