On Jun 2, 2010, at 11:58 AM, Samuel K. Gutierrez wrote:
Good point - I forgot about that.
--
Samuel K. Gutierrez
Los Alamos National Laboratory
On Jun 2, 2010, at 11:40 AM, Jeff Squyres wrote:
Don't forget that the RML is also used to broadcast the success/
failure of the creation of the
Good point - I forgot about that.
--
Samuel K. Gutierrez
Los Alamos National Laboratory
On Jun 2, 2010, at 11:40 AM, Jeff Squyres wrote:
Don't forget that the RML is also used to broadcast the success/
failure of the creation of the shared memory segment.
If the RML goes away, be sure that
Hi George,
That may work - I'll try it.
Thanks!
--
Samuel K. Gutierrez
Los Alamos National Laboratory
On Jun 2, 2010, at 10:59 AM, George Bosilca wrote:
How about ftok ? The init function takes a file_name as argument,
and this file name is unique per instance of the shared memory
region
How about ftok ? The init function takes a file_name as argument, and this file
name is unique per instance of the shared memory region we want to create. We
can use this file name with ftok to create a unique key_t that can be used by
shmget to retrieve the shared memory identifier.
george.
On Jun 2, 2010, at 10:44 AM, George Bosilca wrote:
> > Not sure what you mean here. common/sm may create new shmem segments at
> > any time (e.g., during coll sm). The RML message exchange is to ensure
> > that only 1 process creates and initializes the segment and then all the
> > others
On Jun 2, 2010, at 09:28 , Jeff Squyres wrote:
> On Jun 2, 2010, at 5:38 AM, George Bosilca wrote:
>
>> I think adding support for sysv shared memory is a good thing. However, I
>> have some strong objections over the implementation in the hg tree. Here are
>> 2 of the major ones:
>>
>> 1)
On Jun 2, 2010, at 7:28 AM, Jeff Squyres wrote:
On Jun 2, 2010, at 5:38 AM, George Bosilca wrote:
I think adding support for sysv shared memory is a good thing.
However, I have some strong objections over the implementation in
the hg tree. Here are 2 of the major ones:
1) the sysv shared
On Jun 2, 2010, at 5:38 AM, George Bosilca wrote:
> I think adding support for sysv shared memory is a good thing. However, I
> have some strong objections over the implementation in the hg tree. Here are
> 2 of the major ones:
>
> 1) the sysv shared memory creation is __atomic__ based on the
I think adding support for sysv shared memory is a good thing. However, I have
some strong objections over the implementation in the hg tree. Here are 2 of
the major ones:
1) the sysv shared memory creation is __atomic__ based on the flags used.
Therefore, all the RML messages exchange is
vel-boun...@open-mpi.org>
To: Open MPI Developers <de...@open-mpi.org>
Sent: Tue Jun 01 13:08:46 2010
Subject: [OMPI devel] RFC: System V Shared Memory for Open MPI
WHAT: New System V shared memory component.
WHY: https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/ompi/ticket/1320
WHERE:
M ompi/mca/btl
Doh!
bitbucket repository: http://bitbucket.org/samuelkgutierrez/ompi_sysv_sm
Thanks,
--
Samuel K. Gutierrez
Los Alamos National Laboratory
On Jun 1, 2010, at 11:08 AM, Samuel K. Gutierrez wrote:
WHAT: New System V shared memory component.
WHY:
11 matches
Mail list logo
