Skip to content

v3.x: osc/rdma: use extent of the appropriate datatype in ompi_osc_rdma_rge… #3598

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Conversation

ggouaillardet
Copy link
Contributor

…t_accumulate_internal()

origin_datatype and target_datatype might be different and hence have different extent,
so use either origin_extent or target_extent when appropriate.

Refs #3569

Signed-off-by: Gilles Gouaillardet [email protected]
(cherry picked from commit 0f79259)

…t_accumulate_internal()

origin_datatype and target_datatype might be different and hence have different extent,
so use either origin_extent or target_extent when appropriate.

Refs open-mpi#3569

Signed-off-by: Gilles Gouaillardet <[email protected]>
(cherry picked from commit 0f79259)
@ggouaillardet ggouaillardet added this to the v3.0.0 milestone May 29, 2017
@ggouaillardet ggouaillardet requested a review from hjelmn May 29, 2017 00:18
@ggouaillardet ggouaillardet changed the title osc/rdma: use extent of the appropriate datatype in ompi_osc_rdma_rge… v3.x: osc/rdma: use extent of the appropriate datatype in ompi_osc_rdma_rge… May 29, 2017
@ggouaillardet
Copy link
Contributor Author

@bwbarrett @edgargabriel CI failed at UH
the root cause is libtool requirement was bumped to 2.4.6 and UH is still running libtool 2.4.2
(fwiw, 2.4.2 is the default libtool version of RHEL7)

@bwbarrett bwbarrett changed the base branch from v3.x to v3.0.x May 31, 2017 02:03
@bwbarrett
Copy link
Member

bot:ompi:retest

@bwbarrett
Copy link
Member

@ggouaillardet, i don't understand your statement. This PR is against 3.x (well, now 3.0.x), where the libtool fixes haven't been merged. So whatever the failure was, it shouldn't have been because of the libtool versions.

@bwbarrett
Copy link
Member

bot:ompi:retest

1 similar comment
@bwbarrett
Copy link
Member

bot:ompi:retest

@ggouaillardet
Copy link
Contributor Author

@bwbarret when i read the logs, the error was caused by PMIx complaining about libtool < 2.4.6
the logs are no more available, and as you said, PMIx is fine with libtool 2.4.2 in v3 branches.
so either Jenkins did not test the correct branch (i saw that before in the libtool related PR) or i did not comment on the right PR.

@bwbarrett
Copy link
Member

bot:ompi:retest

1 similar comment
@bwbarrett
Copy link
Member

bot:ompi:retest

@bwbarrett
Copy link
Member

@ggouaillardet, I think you're right; the Jenkins builders were not building exactly what we expected. I've reconfigured the sub-builders from the open-mpi.pull_request job to be more explicit in which sha1 to test. I've also added an output line in the builder script to print the sha1 of the commit being built to try and avoid confusion in the future. For example:

...
+ /bin/sh open-mpi-build-script.sh
--> platform: Darwin
--> version: 16.6.0
--> Compiler setup: 
--> Building commit a3d67fa1507cd8506e340f6e71225bde815aa775
--> running ./autogen.pl 
Open MPI autogen (buckle up!)

1. Checking tool versions
...

Anyway, builds chugging along on this PR, hopefully this mess is behind us now...

@bwbarrett
Copy link
Member

bot:ompi:retest

Accidentally killed a very slow cray builder

Note that the open-mpi.* tests were a configuration error and will never mark as complete. As soon as the Pull Request Build Checker goes green, we should be good to merge.

a buffer defined by (buf, count, dt)
will have data starting at buf+offset and ending len bytes later with
len = opal_datatype_span(&dt.super, count, &offset);

Signed-off-by: Gilles Gouaillardet <[email protected]>

(cherry picked from commit open-mpi/ompi@e622ca8)
@hppritcha
Copy link
Member

@hjelmn please review

@hppritcha hppritcha merged commit ac51814 into open-mpi:v3.0.x Jun 22, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants