On 05-Mar-14 18:08, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) wrote:
On Mar 3, 2014, at 10:59 PM, Vasily Filipov wrote:
Yes, it is possible, but there is some different if I will do it this way -
With the current implementation (today into a trunk) if AC_RUN_IFELSE fails
=> old code of RDMACM will rise,
A
On Mar 6, 2014, at 4:08 AM, Vasily Filipov wrote:
>> #if HAVE_DECL_AF_IB
>>rc = try_using_af_ib();
>>if (OMPI_ERR_NOT_AVAILABLE == rc) {
>>rc = try_the_other_way();
>>}
>> #else
>>rc = try_the_other_way();
>> #endif
>I mean I cannot use "another way" if func call for
Let me see if I can help translate. I think the problem here is Jeff's
comment about a "run time check", which wasn't actually what he is
proposing here.
If you look at Jeff's proposed code, what he is saying is that you don't
need to use AC_TRY_RUN - you can just build based on whether or not AF_
but AF_IB is always declared, regardless of actual presence in the kernel.
On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Ralph Castain wrote:
> Let me see if I can help translate. I think the problem here is Jeff's
> comment about a "run time check", which wasn't actually what he is
> proposing here.
>
> If
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 03:46:58PM +0100, Adrian Reber wrote:
> > >>> I tried to implement something like you described. It is not yet event
> > >>> driven, but before continuing I wanted to get some feedback if it is at
> > >>> least the right start:
> > >>>
> > >>> https://lisas.de/git/?p=open-m
On Mar 6, 2014, at 1:02 PM, Adrian Reber wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 03:46:58PM +0100, Adrian Reber wrote:
>> I tried to implement something like you described. It is not yet event
>> driven, but before continuing I wanted to get some feedback if it is at
>> least the right star
