Sounds perfect.
How about this -- since your and my changes are inter-dependent, can
you send me a patch for the paffinity change? I'll apply it at the
same time that I apply the new PLPA (later today).
Thanks!
On Feb 21, 2008, at 7:39 AM, Sharon Melamed wrote:
Yes, I think we should change paffinity.h and
paffinity_solaris_module.c and
paffinity_windows_module.c .
I added those API's some time ago based on the plpa API's. Now, the
plpa API
has changed and no one uses those API's. (Except me and in the
future, maybe
Sun guys) So I don't see why not change those API's including their
signature in paffinity.h
Sharon.
-----Original Message-----
From: devel-boun...@open-mpi.org [mailto:devel-boun...@open-mpi.org]
On
Behalf Of Jeff Squyres
Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2008 5:19 PM
To: Open MPI Developers
Subject: Re: [OMPI devel] PLPA ready?
On Feb 21, 2008, at 7:13 AM, Jeff Squyres wrote:
Right, but the plpa_solaris_module.c file will need to be updated
with
the new function signatures so that it will still compile (i.e., if
you're going to be changing the function signatures in paffinity.h).
Hah -- I meant paffinity_solaris_module.c. :-)
--
Jeff Squyres
Cisco Systems
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
de...@open-mpi.org
http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
de...@open-mpi.org
http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
--
Jeff Squyres
Cisco Systems
