As it is already given the commit is specified. Been thinking about trying to bring it and a handful of other fixes to master before the rest of the commits.
-Nathan On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 11:08:46AM -0700, Howard Pritchard wrote: > Nathan, > Please make sure the fix for this problem is contained in its own commit. > Howard > 2014-12-12 9:38 GMT-07:00 Nathan Hjelm <hje...@lanl.gov>: > > Yeah, that code is completely wrong. I have a fix in my btl > modifications branch. > > > https://github.com/hjelmn/ompi/commit/38e961193074d382983d000e68adb721aaf3df7d > > -Nathan > > On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 08:26:34AM -0800, Ralph Castain wrote: > > Hey folks > > I've been looking into this warning: > > btl_openib_component.c: In function 'init_one_device': > > btl_openib_component.c:2019:54: warning: comparison between 'enum > > <anonymous>' and 'mca_base_var_source_t' [-Wenum-compare] > > else if (BTL_OPENIB_RQ_SOURCE_DEVICE_INI == > > ^ > > This warning is really valid - the equality can *never* be true. > > Essentially, someone defined two enum types, and is now trying to > check if > > one is equal to the other. This is the code block under concern: > > else if (BTL_OPENIB_RQ_SOURCE_DEVICE_INI == > > mca_btl_openib_component.receive_queues_source) { > > opal_show_help("help-mpi-btl-openib.txt", > > "locally conflicting > receive_queues", true, > > opal_install_dirs.opaldatadir, > > opal_process_info.nodename, > > > > ibv_get_device_name(receive_queues_device->ib_dev), > > > > receive_queues_device->ib_dev_attr.vendor_id, > > > > receive_queues_device->ib_dev_attr.vendor_part_id, > > > mca_btl_openib_component.receive_queues, > > ibv_get_device_name(device->ib_dev), > > device->ib_dev_attr.vendor_id, > > device->ib_dev_attr.vendor_part_id, > > > mca_btl_openib_component.default_recv_qps); > > ret = OPAL_ERR_RESOURCE_BUSY; > > goto error; > > } > > BTL_OPENIB_RQ_SOURCE_DEVICE_INI is defined as an enum in the openib > code. > > The receive_queues_source field is an MCA base enum that indicates > the > > source of the param. In this case, it is indicating that the source > was a > > file, but says nothing about which file. > > I don't want to step on toes to fix this, but the code clearly is > wrong. > > Can someone please fix it? It's in the master as well as in the 1.8 > branch > > Thanks > > Ralph > > > _______________________________________________ > > devel mailing list > > de...@open-mpi.org > > Subscription: http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel > > Link to this post: > http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/devel/2014/12/16546.php > > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list > de...@open-mpi.org > Subscription: http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel > Link to this post: > http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/devel/2014/12/16550.php > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list > de...@open-mpi.org > Subscription: http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel > Link to this post: > http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/devel/2014/12/16556.php
pgpvsM40QurXj.pgp
Description: PGP signature
