Re: [OMPI devel] v2.1.5rc1 is out

2018-08-17 Thread Vallee, Geoffroy R.
I would assume so as well and the 2.x series is not really critical for these systems, especially since 3.x is not having the problem. I have no problem ignoring that problem. > On Aug 17, 2018, at 3:48 PM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) via devel > wrote: > > Thanks for the testing. > > I'm

Re: [OMPI devel] v2.1.5rc1 is out

2018-08-17 Thread Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) via devel
Thanks for the testing. I'm assuming the MXM failure has been around for a while, and the correct way to fix it is to upgrade to a newer Open MPI and/or use UCX. > On Aug 17, 2018, at 11:01 AM, Vallee, Geoffroy R. wrote: > > FYI, that segfault problem did not occur when I tested 3.1.2rc1. >

Re: [OMPI devel] v2.1.5rc1 is out

2018-08-17 Thread Vallee, Geoffroy R.
FYI, that segfault problem did not occur when I tested 3.1.2rc1. Thanks, > On Aug 17, 2018, at 10:28 AM, Pavel Shamis wrote: > > It looks to me like mxm related failure ? > > On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 1:51 PM Vallee, Geoffroy R. wrote: > Hi, > > I ran some tests on Summitdev here at ORNL: >

Re: [OMPI devel] v2.1.5rc1 is out

2018-08-17 Thread Pavel Shamis
It looks to me like mxm related failure ? On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 1:51 PM Vallee, Geoffroy R. wrote: > Hi, > > I ran some tests on Summitdev here at ORNL: > - the UCX problem is solved and I get the expected results for the tests > that I am running (netpipe and IMB). > - without UCX: >

Re: [OMPI devel] v2.1.5rc1 is out

2018-08-16 Thread Vallee, Geoffroy R.
Hi, I ran some tests on Summitdev here at ORNL: - the UCX problem is solved and I get the expected results for the tests that I am running (netpipe and IMB). - without UCX: * the performance numbers are below what would be expected but I believe at this point that the slight performance

Re: [OMPI devel] v2.1.5rc1 is out

2018-08-16 Thread Vallee, Geoffroy R.
Hi, I ran some tests on Summitdev here at ORNL: - the UCX problem is solved and I get the expected results for the tests that I am running (netpipe and IMB). - without UCX: * the performance numbers are below what would be expected but I believe at this point that the slight performance