-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 16
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
Add Openmpi using new libfabric to stackinator options #210
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
a spec such as openmpi ^cassini-headers@main +cuda is invalid since the+cuda variant should be applied to the openmpi spec and not the cassini-headers one. This patch makes sure that extra variants are added before dependents, eg openmpi +cuda ^cassini-headers@main
I have improved the syntax somewhat and updated the docs. I think this is now ready for review and I have been testing it quite extensively with some variations on builds/branches/etc. |
openmpi-custom-env: | ||
mpi: | ||
spec: [email protected]=main | ||
xspec: +continuations +internal-pmix fabrics=cma,ofi,xpmem schedulers=slurm +cray-xpmem |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
xspec: +continuations +internal-pmix fabrics=cma,ofi,xpmem schedulers=slurm +cray-xpmem | |
variants: +continuations +internal-pmix fabrics=cma,ofi,xpmem schedulers=slurm +cray-xpmem |
? C.f. https://github.com/eth-cscs/alps-cluster-config/pull/23/files#r1993297476.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
xspec
is a new keyword @biddisco introduced for this specific use case, not to be confused with the variants
keyword used in the cluster configs.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sorry, I didn't make myself clear (at all; I thought I did in another comment somewhere but I've confused myself with the two PRs):
Can we please call it something other than xspec
? I wasn't saying this is a bug. I think xspec
is a strange name. It's not a spec, and x
is too ambiguous in my opinion. If we want to keep the extra
meaning of x
, why not something like extra_variants
? This is specifying additional variants for the chosen MPI package if I understand correctly?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The link to the comment on the other PR makes sort of the same point that I wanted to make here, but for another field...
@@ -207,7 +271,7 @@ The list of software packages to install is configured in the `spec:` field of a | |||
The `deprecated: ` field controls if Spack should consider versions marked as deprecated, and can be set to `true` or `false` (for considering or not considering deprecated versions, respectively). | |||
|
|||
The `unify:` field controls the Spack concretiser, and can be set to three values `true`, `false` or `when_possible`. | |||
The | |||
The |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The |
?
Co-authored-by: Mikael Simberg <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Mikael Simberg <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Mikael Simberg <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Mikael Simberg <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Mikael Simberg <[email protected]>
should now use the latest openmpi@5 and new libfabric