> On Jun 21, 2018, at 6:47 AM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) via devel > <devel@lists.open-mpi.org> wrote: > > On Jun 21, 2018, at 9:41 AM, r...@open-mpi.org wrote: >> >> Alternatively, processes can be assigned to processors based on >> their local rank on a node using the \fI--bind-to cpuset:ordered\fP option >> with an associated \fI--cpu-list "0,2,5"\fP. This directs that the first >> rank on a node be bound to cpu0, the second rank on the node be bound >> to cpu1, and the third rank on the node be bound to cpu5. Note that an >> error will result if more processes are assigned to a node than cpus >> are provided. > > Question about this: do the CPUs in the list correspond to the Linux virtual > processor IDs? E.g., do they correspond to what one would pass to numactl(1)?
I didn’t change the meaning of the list - it is still the local cpu ID per hwloc > > Also, a minor quibble: it might be a little confusing to have --bind-to > cpuset, and then have to specify a CPU list (not a CPU set). Should it be > --cpuset-list or --cpuset? Your PR is welcome! Historically, that option has always been --cpu-list and I didn’t change it > > -- > Jeff Squyres > jsquy...@cisco.com > > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list > devel@lists.open-mpi.org > https://lists.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo/devel _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@lists.open-mpi.org https://lists.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
