Sure. -----Original Message----- From: devel-boun...@open-mpi.org [mailto:devel-boun...@open-mpi.org] On Behalf Of Jeff Squyres Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2008 6:58 PM To: Open MPI Developers Subject: Re: [OMPI devel] PLPA ready?
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 _______________________________________________ devel mailing list de...@open-mpi.org http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
linux-paffinity.patch
Description: Binary data
