On Feb 10, 2012, at 1:00 PM, TERRY DONTJE wrote: >> Should we add "virbr0" to the default value for [btl|oob]_tcp_if_exclude? >> > What happens to that value if you then set btl_tcp_if_exclude to some value > on the mpirun command line?
It works just fine. I.e., if you mpirun --mca btl_tcp_if_exclude lo,virbr0 ... That works like a champ. But per Ralph's question, I don't know how generic that name is. It *seems* to be specific to a virtualization interface (I assume "virbr" = "virtual bridge"), but I can't say that for sure. > So this brings me to something that has annoyed me for a bit. It seems to me > that maybe it would be nice to have a conf file that you can dump interface > names to exclude but would not be interpreted as a btl_tcp_if_exclude > options. For example there were some interfaces on certain Sun machine (a > long time ago) that went to the diagnostic processor and caused a similar > issue as the virbr0 issue. So we started delivering a conf file that set > btl_tcp_if_exclude but then this precluded anyone from being able to set > btl_tcp_if_include. If we had a file one could specify the set of interfaces > to use or exclude but allow the user to operate on the result of that set it > seems that would be nice. I'm not sure what you're saying. CLI always overrides config files...? -- Jeff Squyres jsquy...@cisco.com For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/