Thanks for the info. The window's going to be smaller (the predefined code already existed, so it shouldn¹t matter that much). There were a bunch of fields that really should have been in the module structure that was kept in the window previously.
Brian On 3/26/12 11:44 AM, "Jeffrey Squyres" <jsquy...@cisco.com> wrote: >I don't think so. > >IIRC, that test is mainly a sanity check to ensure we haven't broken >anything in the overall debugging scheme -- not necessarily that we are >using those specific fields. (Terry: can you confirm?) > >Could you replace one or two of those fields with any other fields on the >new window structure? > > >On Mar 26, 2012, at 1:17 PM, Barrett, Brian W wrote: > >> Hi all - >> >> In ompi/debuggers/predefined_gap_test.c, there's set of tests looking at >> all the fields in a window structure. The other source files in >> ompi/debuggers/ don't seem to use most of those fields (since they >>really >> shouldn't be useful to a debugger anyway). I removed some of the fields >> as part of my MPI-3 RMA changes; is there anything I need to do other >>than >> remove those GAP_CHECK() calls in the test code? >> >> Thanks, >> >> Brian >> >> -- >> 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/ > > >_______________________________________________ >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
