Closed mtitov closed 4 years ago
as a follow up comment/question - since there is no summitdev
at RP, should it be removed from RS as well?
Hi @mtitov - I'm hesitant to touch the SAGA API. It's the one API we have very tightly defined, and so far we managed to stick to that spec. I would suggest to move the SMT setting to the CPUArchitecture
attribute, maybe as SMT:n
?
@andre-merzky I see your point and I agree not to have it as a separate attribute, but have more changes to propose then :)
CPUArchitecture
be renamed into SystemArchitecture
? (considering that it might contain information about GPUs as well)CPU[System]Architecture
as a dictionary (currently its value is a single string: architecture name) for a better extension of it with description parameters. And to have the following possible keys: ['cpu', 'gpu', 'smt']
# radical.saga.job.description
self._attributes_register (CPU_ARCHITECTURE, None, sa.STRING, sa.DICT, sa.WRITEABLE)
All fair points - but I'd still rather stick to the specification for the time being which also defines the attribute names and types. We may at some point want to touch the spec itself and update it, but I don't think that is a can of worms we should open right now...
Closed in favor PR #806
SMT can be set with the following values
[1, 2, 4]
(according to Hardware Threads at the Summit User Guide)Test run was made at Lassen (since Lassen also support SMT) with the following additional parameters:
and for the RP layer set the following environment variable
Later this will be unified in a way that only one parameter would be needed (either one or another). These updates will be provided at the RP ticket #2167