Re: [hwloc-devel] [hwloc-svn] svn:hwloc r1255

2009-10-29 Thread Jeff Squyres
On Oct 29, 2009, at 9:28 AM, Samuel Thibault wrote: What I'm not in favor of is having it try STRICT and if that fails, try LOOSE. It feels to me like if the user wants STRICT, they should try it. And if it fails, they should be notified of that (through the function failing) and then they

Re: [hwloc-devel] [hwloc-svn] svn:hwloc r1255

2009-10-29 Thread Jeff Squyres
On Oct 29, 2009, at 7:38 AM, Samuel Thibault wrote: I'm just wondering: maybe by default hwloc should try strict binding and if it fails, if the strict flag is set, error out, else revert to non-strict binding. That way only people who really want absolute strict binding and fail if it is not

Re: [hwloc-devel] [hwloc-svn] svn:hwloc r1255

2009-10-29 Thread Samuel Thibault
sthib...@osl.iu.edu, le Thu 29 Oct 2009 07:33:39 -0400, a écrit : > + * \note Depending on OSes and implementations, strict binding > + * may not be possible (implementation reason) or not allowed > + * (administrative reasons), and the function will fail in that case. I'm just wondering: maybe