Jeff Squyres, le Thu 13 Sep 2012 00:46:33 +0200, a écrit :
> On Sep 12, 2012, at 6:44 PM, Samuel Thibault wrote:
>
> >> Anyone have an opinion? I'm 60/40 in favor of not letting it run, under
> >> the rationale that the user asked for something that we can't deliver, so
> >> we shouldn't contin
Jeff Squyres, le Thu 13 Sep 2012 00:45:56 +0200, a écrit :
> On Sep 12, 2012, at 6:42 PM, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > No, we have it, but not all solaris systems have it.
>
>
> Ah, I see. So if Siegmar had done "hwloc-bind socket:0 ..." -- assuming his
> system has lgrp support -- that should wo
On Sep 12, 2012, at 6:44 PM, Samuel Thibault wrote:
>> Anyone have an opinion? I'm 60/40 in favor of not letting it run, under the
>> rationale that the user asked for something that we can't deliver, so we
>> shouldn't continue.
>
> Well, it depends on the situation. The binding might only be
On Sep 12, 2012, at 6:42 PM, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> No, we have it, but not all solaris systems have it.
Ah, I see. So if Siegmar had done "hwloc-bind socket:0 ..." -- assuming his
system has lgrp support -- that should work. right?
--
Jeff Squyres
jsquy...@cisco.com
For corporate legal i
Jeff Squyres, le Thu 13 Sep 2012 00:26:50 +0200, a écrit :
> On Sep 12, 2012, at 10:30 AM, Samuel Thibault wrote:
>
> >> Sidenote: if hwloc-bind fails to bind, should we still launch the child
> >> process?
> >
> > Well, it's up to you to decide :)
Ah, sorry, I hadn't understood the question ac
Jeff Squyres, le Thu 13 Sep 2012 00:25:24 +0200, a écrit :
> On Sep 12, 2012, at 10:28 AM, Samuel Thibault wrote:
>
> >> He seems to get an hwloc error any time he tries to bind to more than 1
> >> PU. Is that expected on Solaris?
> >
> > Without lgrp support, unfortunately yes: the processor_b
On Sep 12, 2012, at 10:30 AM, Samuel Thibault wrote:
>> Sidenote: if hwloc-bind fails to bind, should we still launch the child
>> process?
>
> Well, it's up to you to decide :)
Anyone have an opinion? I'm 60/40 in favor of not letting it run, under the
rationale that the user asked for some
On Sep 12, 2012, at 10:28 AM, Samuel Thibault wrote:
>> He seems to get an hwloc error any time he tries to bind to more than 1 PU.
>> Is that expected on Solaris?
>
> Without lgrp support, unfortunately yes: the processor_bind solaris interface
> only permits to bind to one processor.
>
> Wi
I forgot to answer this:
Jeff Squyres, le Wed 12 Sep 2012 16:16:57 +0200, a écrit :
> Sidenote: if hwloc-bind fails to bind, should we still launch the child
> process?
Well, it's up to you to decide :)
Samuel
Jeff Squyres, le Wed 12 Sep 2012 16:16:57 +0200, a écrit :
> He seems to get an hwloc error any time he tries to bind to more than 1 PU.
> Is that expected on Solaris?
Without lgrp support, unfortunately yes: the processor_bind solaris interface
only permits to bind to one processor.
With lgrp
If I remember correctly, Solaris won't let you bind to random sets of
PUs. It can bind to single PUs, sets of NUMA nodes, or an entire
machine, or something like this.
hwloc-bind has a --strict option (that sets HWLOC_CPUBIND_STRICT). Maybe
that needs to be improved.
Brice
Le 12/09/2012 16:16
Brice / Samuel --
How well does hwloc work for process binding on Solaris? This is not something
I've followed closely (note that Terry Dontje has moved on to other projects
inside Oracle, so he's no longer my go-to guy for All Things Solaris...).
Siegmar Gross (CC'ed) originally had a binding
12 matches
Mail list logo
