Yeah, that won't work. The id's cannot be reused, so you'd have to assign a
different one in each case.
On Dec 20, 2012, at 9:12 AM, Victor Kocheganov
wrote:
> In every 'modex' block I use coll->id = orte_process_info.peer_modex; id
> and in every 'barrier' block I use coll->id =
> orte_p
In every 'modex' block I use coll->id = orte_process_info.peer_modex; id
and in every 'barrier' block I use coll->id = orte_process_info.peer_init_
barrier; id.
P.s. In general (as I wrote in first letter), I use 'modex' term for
following code:
coll = OBJ_NEW(orte_grpcomm_collective_t);
On Dec 20, 2012, at 8:29 AM, Victor Kocheganov
wrote:
> Thanks for fast answer, Ralph.
>
> In my example I use different collective objects. I mean in every mentioned
> block I call coll = OBJ_NEW(orte_grpcomm_collective_t);
> and OBJ_RELEASE(coll); , so all the grpcomm operations use uniq
Thanks for fast answer, Ralph.
In my example I use different collective objects. I mean in every mentioned
block I call *coll = OBJ_NEW(orte_grpcomm_**collective_t);*
and *OBJ_RELEASE(coll);* , so all the grpcomm operations use unique
collective object.
On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 7:48 PM, Ralph Ca
Absolutely it will hang as the collective object passed into any grpcomm
operation (modex or barrier) is only allowed to be used once - any attempt to
reuse it will fail.
On Dec 20, 2012, at 6:57 AM, Victor Kocheganov
wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I have an issue with understanding ompi_mpi_init() logi
Hi.
I have an issue with understanding /ompi_mpi_init() /logic. Could you
please tell me if you have any guesses about following behavior.
I wonder if I understand ringh, there is a block in /ompi_mpi_init()
/function for exchanging procs information between processes (denote
this block 'mod
Many thanks, Macro!
I'll examine these in January when I return from vacation. There certainly
won't be an OMPI 1.6.x release before then, anyway.
On Dec 20, 2012, at 8:18 AM, marco atzeri wrote:
> On 12/20/2012 1:59 PM, Jeff Squyres wrote:
>> Thank you! I've filed https://svn.open-mpi.org
(taking the liberty of moving this thread to the devel list...)
On Dec 19, 2012, at 9:22 AM, Siegmar Gross wrote:
>> I think the real shortcoming is that there is no Datatype.Resized
>> function. That can be fixed.
>
> Are you sure? That would at least solve one problem.
I think so. We "own"
On 12/20/2012 1:59 PM, Jeff Squyres wrote:
Thank you! I've filed https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/ompi/ticket/3437 about
this.
Do you have any Open MPI v1.6-specific patches that would be useful to merge
upstream? I've looked through my email and don't see any, but I could be
missing them.
Thank you! I've filed https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/ompi/ticket/3437 about
this.
Do you have any Open MPI v1.6-specific patches that would be useful to merge
upstream? I've looked through my email and don't see any, but I could be
missing them.
On Dec 19, 2012, at 12:50 PM, marco atzeri wro
10 matches
Mail list logo
