Fawzi Mohamed, le Fri 02 Apr 2010 17:34:20 +0200, a écrit :
> would be fine with me, planning to add al lot of flags? because there
> is still lot of space to grow (and one can later switch to 64 bit... :)
Just switching to 64bits would break the ABI. It's better to just use
chars and be done wi
On 2-apr-10, at 16:17, Samuel Thibault wrote:
Fawzi Mohamed, le Fri 02 Apr 2010 14:38:26 +0200, a écrit :
I would take advantage more info about the possible numa node
connectivity (to
know where to steal tasks),
This is on the TODO list, although (as Brice mentioned) OS often do
not
pr
On 2-apr-10, at 16:16, Samuel Thibault wrote:
Fawzi Mohamed, le Fri 02 Apr 2010 12:34:58 +0200, a écrit :
flags attributes:
C bitfields are used, normally they are avoided because they are slow
(a compiler can bit or at compile time the constants and check/set
several at once.
Speed is not a c
Fawzi Mohamed, le Fri 02 Apr 2010 14:38:26 +0200, a écrit :
> I would take advantage more info about the possible numa node connectivity (to
> know where to steal tasks),
This is on the TODO list, although (as Brice mentioned) OS often do not
provide such information.
Thanks for the comments!
Sam
Fawzi Mohamed, le Fri 02 Apr 2010 12:34:58 +0200, a écrit :
> flags attributes:
> C bitfields are used, normally they are avoided because they are slow
> (a compiler can bit or at compile time the constants and check/set
> several at once.
> Speed is not a concern here, but in any case I am wra
On 2-apr-10, at 14:49, Brice Goglin wrote:
Fawzi Mohamed wrote:
I would take advantage more info about the possible numa node
connectivity (to know where to steal tasks), but I don't have access
to machines that would really take advantage of that, and probably
even then using the HW structure
Fawzi Mohamed wrote:
> I would take advantage more info about the possible numa node
> connectivity (to know where to steal tasks), but I don't have access
> to machines that would really take advantage of that, and probably
> even then using the HW structure as topology would not bad.
NUMA connec
On 2-apr-10, at 13:14, Brice Goglin wrote:
Fawzi Mohamed wrote:
Building tools
rather new autoconf/automake/libtool are requested
I had to install them even on new clusters, nothing terrible, but I
just noted it...
Yes, but there are nightly snapshots in
http://www.open-mpi.org/software/hwlo
On Apr 2, 2010, at 7:14 AM, Brice Goglin wrote:
> Me too, it's been way too long already :) We moved some features out of
> 1.0 back to 1.1 (memory binding for instance) because we wanted 1.0
> early. We would probably have had time top implement them twice in the
> meantime ;)
Heh. Slow and ste
Fawzi Mohamed wrote:
> Building tools
> rather new autoconf/automake/libtool are requested
> I had to install them even on new clusters, nothing terrible, but I
> just noted it...
Yes, but there are nightly snapshots in
http://www.open-mpi.org/software/hwloc/nightly/trunk/
You don't need autotools
10 matches
Mail list logo
