Re: [hwloc-devel] gather-topology fix and manpage

2010-12-20 Thread Jiri Hladky
Brice, thanks for looking into it! Regarding the naming. I would argue that since the utility is currently called hwloc-gather-topology.sh then the man page should be named hwloc-gather-topology.sh.1 What's your opinion? I have just one question regarding this code: if [ -z "$name" -o x`echo $n

Re: [hwloc-devel] 1.0.3rc3 and 1.1rc5

2010-12-20 Thread Brice Goglin
Le 20/12/2010 20:06, Guy Streeter a écrit : > I decided I should just give you the whole output. Thanks. Indeed, it's a Linux "feature". When you request a non-strict memory binding in Linux (MPOL_PREFERRED, not MPOL_BIND), it only keeps the first node in the input nodemask. Instead of allocating

Re: [hwloc-devel] 1.0.3rc3 and 1.1rc5

2010-12-20 Thread Guy Streeter
On 12/20/2010 12:56 PM, Brice Goglin wrote: Le 20/12/2010 19:40, Guy Streeter a écrit : Get this singlethreaded process memory : expected 0x000f, got 0xf...f Is that a bug? That's on my Fedora 13 non-numa system. This is kind of expected. 0x000f means all the cores in the machine. 0x

Re: [hwloc-devel] 1.0.3rc3 and 1.1rc5

2010-12-20 Thread Guy Streeter
On 12/20/2010 12:56 PM, Brice Goglin wrote: Le 20/12/2010 19:40, Guy Streeter a écrit : Get this singlethreaded process memory : expected 0x000f, got 0xf...f Is that a bug? That's on my Fedora 13 non-numa system. This is kind of expected. 0x000f means all the cores in the machine. 0x

Re: [hwloc-devel] 1.0.3rc3 and 1.1rc5

2010-12-20 Thread Brice Goglin
Le 20/12/2010 19:40, Guy Streeter a écrit : > Get this singlethreaded process memory : expected 0x000f, got > 0xf...f > > Is that a bug? > That's on my Fedora 13 non-numa system. This is kind of expected. 0x000f means all the cores in the machine. 0xf...f means all the machine when the ma

Re: [hwloc-devel] 1.0.3rc3 and 1.1rc5

2010-12-20 Thread Guy Streeter
On 12/16/2010 06:03 AM, Jeff Squyres wrote: Both have been posted. http://www.open-mpi.org/software/hwloc/v1.0/ http://www.open-mpi.org/software/hwloc/v1.1/ I have not updated the docs for these rc's on the web site in anticipation that these are final/quick rc's and the real release

Re: [hwloc-devel] Bug in v1.1 bitmap API

2010-12-20 Thread Brice Goglin
Le 20/12/2010 15:20, Bernd Kallies a écrit : > Hallo, > > while browsing through the implementation of the bitmap API in hwloc 1.1 > and comparing it with the cpuset API of hwloc 1.0, it turns out that > hwloc_bitmap_alloc uses malloc and leaves struct member ulongs > uninitialized, wheres 1.0 used

[hwloc-devel] Bug in v1.1 bitmap API

2010-12-20 Thread Bernd Kallies
Hallo, while browsing through the implementation of the bitmap API in hwloc 1.1 and comparing it with the cpuset API of hwloc 1.0, it turns out that hwloc_bitmap_alloc uses malloc and leaves struct member ulongs uninitialized, wheres 1.0 used calloc. This leads to random bitmap content after crea

[hwloc-devel] gather-topology fix and manpage

2010-12-20 Thread Brice Goglin
Jirka, I have committed (locally) some changes that should address everything you reported and that are ok to backport in 1.1. I improved your manpage proposal too. See attached. By the way, I don't know if the manpage should be named .1 or .sh.1. There won't be any 1.1.1 release before a couple we

Re: [hwloc-devel] Images from lstopo slightly truncated width wise when in cpuset

2010-12-20 Thread Brice Goglin
Le 19/12/2010 23:30, Jiri Hladky a écrit : > In the current version (1.1), hwloc-gather-topology.sh is not very robust: hwloc-gather-topo already changed in trunk since the 1.1 release unfortunately, I need to see if your changes still apply. Apart from that, it should be ok for trunk. However I