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/


Reply via email to