How about 

  --enable-mpi-threads  ==>  --enable-multi-threads
    ENABLE_MPI_THREADS  ==>    ENABLE_MULTI_THREADS

Essentially, s/mpi/multi/ig.  This gives us "progress thread" support and 
"multi thread" support.  Similar, but different.

Another possibility instead of "mpi" could be "concurrent".



On Jan 28, 2010, at 9:24 PM, Barrett, Brian W wrote:

> Jeff -
> 
> I think the idea is ok, but I think the name needs some thought.  There's 
> currently two ways to have the lower layers be thread safe -- enabling MPI 
> threads or progress threads.  The two can be done independently -- you can 
> disable MPI threads and still enable thread support by enabling progress 
> threads.
> 
> So either that behavior would need to change or we need a better name (in my 
> opinion...).
> 
> Brian
> 
> On Jan 28, 2010, at 8:53 PM, Jeff Squyres wrote:
> 
> > WHAT: Rename --enable-mpi-threads and ENABLE_MPI_THREADS to 
> > --enable-thread-safety and ENABLE_THREAD_SAFETY, respectively 
> > (--enable-mpi-threads will be maintained as a synonym to 
> > --enable-thread-safety for backwards compat, of course).
> >
> > WHY: Other projects are starting to use ORTE and OPAL without OMPI.  The 
> > fact that thread safety in OPAL and ORTE requires a configure switch with 
> > "mpi" in the name is very non-intuitive.
> >
> > WHERE: A bunch of places in the code; see attached patch.
> >
> > WHEN: Next Friday COB
> >
> > TIMEOUT: COB, Friday, Feb 5, 2010
> >
> > ------------------------
> >
> > More details:
> >
> > Cisco is starting to investigate using ORTE and OPAL in various threading 
> > scenarios -- without the OMPI layer.  The fact that you need to enable 
> > thread safety in ORTE/OPAL with a configure switch that has the word "mpi" 
> > in it is extremely counter-intuitive (it bit some of our engineers very 
> > badly, and they were mighty annoyed!!).
> >
> > Since this functionality actually has nothing to do with MPI (it's actually 
> > the other way around -- MPI_THREAD_MULTIPLE needs this functionality), we 
> > really should rename this switch and the corresponding AC_DEFINE -- I 
> > suggest:
> >
> > --enable|disable-thread-safety
> > ENABLE_THREAD_SAFETY
> >
> > Of course, we need to keep the configure switch 
> > "--enable|disable-mpi-threads" for backwards compatibility, so that can be 
> > a synonym to --enable-thread-safety.
> >
> > See the attached patch (the biggest change is in 
> > opal/config/opal_config_threads.m4).  If there are no objections, I'll 
> > commit this next Friday COB.
> >
> > --
> > Jeff Squyres
> > jsquy...@cisco.com
> > <opal-thread-safety.diff>_______________________________________________
> > devel mailing list
> > de...@open-mpi.org
> > http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
> 
> --
>   Brian W. Barrett
>   Dept. 1423: Scalable System Software
>   Sandia National Laboratories
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list
> de...@open-mpi.org
> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
> 


-- 
Jeff Squyres
jsquy...@cisco.com

For corporate legal information go to:
http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/


Reply via email to