I don't know about "drama", but people did clearly explain to you why this approach was unacceptable. You simply cannot cross-link at the component level. If you need something from the opal/mca/memory framework, you have to get it from the framework level.
Doesn't seem that hard a concept to grasp and follow - failing to do so breaks things for a bunch of people, which is why we don't allow it. So I hope your "configure" approach also takes this into account, or we'll have to revert it again :-( On Apr 13, 2012, at 11:13 AM, Mike Dubman wrote: > Too many drama - we will fix it to detect hooks availability at configure > stage, this will make your life back to normal. > > The problem is not a Mellanox hw, but Intel PCI bus implementation, which > charge extra latency if buffers are not aligned. > The patch is a workaround for this problem and help to non-benchmark code as > well. > > > > On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 7:06 PM, Barrett, Brian W <bwba...@sandia.gov> wrote: > r2655 is awful as a patch. It doesn't work on any non-Linux platform, > which is unpleasant. But worse, what does it possibly accomplish? In > codes other than benchmarks, there's no advantage to aligning the pointer > to 32 or 64 byte boundaries, as the malloced buffer very rarely is exactly > what is sent. So you've done a whole lot of work, screwed with the memory > allocator (which always bites OMPI in the butt), and accomplished nothing > useful. Mellanox should fix the hardware, not make everyone's life > miserable with crappy workarounds. > > MEMORY_LINUX_PTMALLOC2 is the wrong define for what they want. They > should check for __malloc_hook and only use that code if __malloc_hook is > found. > > Brian > > On 4/13/12 9:32 AM, "TERRY DONTJE" <terry.don...@oracle.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > I am thinking MEMORY_LINUX_PTMALLOC2 is probably the right define to > > key off of but this is really going to look gross ifdef'ing out the > > lines that are accessing the Linux memory module. One other idea I > > have is to create a dummy __malloc_hook in the Solaris memory module > > but might there be other OSes that could run into the same > > problem? Or what happens if PTMALLOC2 is not used (does that > > happen)? > > > > --td > > > > On 4/13/2012 10:45 AM, TERRY DONTJE wrote: > > > > > > r26255 is forcing the use of __malloc_hook which is implemented in > > opal/mca/memory/linux however that is not compiled in the library > > when built on Solaris thus causing a referenced symbol not found > > when libmpi tries to load the openib btl. > > > > I am looking how to fix this now but if someone has a good idea > > how to detect when __malloc_hook is used (or not) I'd be > > interested in hearing it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Terry D. Dontje | Principal > > Software Engineer > > Developer > > Tools > > Engineering | +1.781.442.2631 > > > > Oracle > > > > - Performance > > Technologies > > > > 95 Network Drive, Burlington, MA 01803 > > Email terry.don...@oracle.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >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 > > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list > de...@open-mpi.org > http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
