More specifically: if.h has not been changed (except for its finalize function).

So all this change does it un-spaghettify the if.c code.  From an interface 
perspective, the rest of the code base isn't even aware that this change 
occurred.

Also, I think Ralph meant the following URL:

    https://bitbucket.org/rhc/ompi-if




On Aug 24, 2010, at 5:11 PM, Ralph Castain wrote:

> Per the discussion on today's telecon, I've started working with Jeff on 
> refactoring the opal/util/if.c code into something more understandable 
> without changing the discovery logic. We are creating a framework that solely 
> performs interface discovery, leaving all of the interface wrapper functions 
> untouched. The various components are now configured in/out instead of being 
> buried in multiple layers of #if.
> 
> Jeff will be working on the configure logic in the near future. Meantime, the 
> layout of the system is complete and everything builds as it should.
> 
> Operation of the framework is straightforward. When framework open is called, 
> it iterates through all available components and calls their open function. 
> At that time, each component adds to the list of interfaces whatever it 
> finds. The IPv4 interface discovery that was common across posix-based 
> systems is located in a single component. The IPv6 discovery code, which 
> tended to be highly system specific, is in separate components.
> 
> As a result, there may be a change in the order in which interfaces are found 
> on the list from where they appear today. However, this order was never 
> guaranteed anyway, so any code that relied on it is incorrect and should be 
> fixed.
> 
> You are welcome to look at what is being done:
> 
> hg clone https://r...@bitbucket.org/rhc/ompi-if
> 
> Ralph
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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