Jeff, What is the displayed bitmask in OMPI 1.6? Is it the hwloc bitmask? Or the OMPI bitmask made of OMPI indexes? Brice
Le 30/05/2012 16:01, Jeff Squyres a écrit : > You might want to try the OMPI tarball that is about to become OMPI v1.6.1 -- > we made a bunch of affinity-related fixes, and it should be much more > predictable / stable in what it does in terms of process binding: > > http://www.open-mpi.org/~jsquyres/unofficial/ > > (these affinity fixes are not yet in a nightly 1.6 tarball because we're > testing them before they get committed to the OMPI v1.6 SVN branch) > > > On May 30, 2012, at 9:54 AM, Brice Goglin wrote: > >> Hello Youri, >> When using openmpi 1.4.4 with --np 2 --bind-to-core --bycore” it reports the >> following: >>> [hostname:03339] [[17125,0],0] odls:default:fork binding child >>> [[17125,1],0] to cpus 0001 >>> >>> [hostname:03339] [[17125,0],0] odls:default:fork binding child >>> [[17125,1],1] to cpus 0002 >>> >> Bitmask 0001 and 0002 mean CPUs with physical indexes 0 and 1 in OMPI 1.4. >> So that corresponds to the first core of each socket, and that matches what >> hwloc-ps says. Try "hwloc-ps -c" should show the same bitmask. >> >> However, I agree that these are not adjacent cores, but I don't know enough >> of OMPI binding options to understand what it was supposed to do in your >> case. >> >> Brice >> >> _______________________________________________ >> hwloc-users mailing list >> hwloc-us...@open-mpi.org >> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/hwloc-users >
