[mpich-discuss] Possible bug: --enable-g=all configure option does not include all other --enable-g options

[Jim Dinan]

How about, following the gcc model:

--enable-g=all enable most debugging features
--enable-g=extra enable most + additional debugging features

  ~Jim.

On 3/12/13 8:59 AM, William Gropp wrote:
> While I agree that "all" should mean "all", this unfortunate use is
> consistent with gcc, which uses -Wall to mean "most of the warning
> options, but not the ones that who ever is in charge of this release did
> not like or forgot about."
>
> A better name might be --enable-g=most - and for gcc, -Wmost .  Anything
> else is either too long or misleading.
>
> Bill
>
> William Gropp
> Director, Parallel Computing Institute
> Deputy Director for Research
> Institute for Advanced Computing Applications and Technologies
> Thomas M. Siebel Chair in Computer Science
> University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign
>
>
>
>
> On Mar 11, 2013, at 8:14 PM, Jeff Hammond wrote:
>
>> --enable-g=all should enable all debugging options to satisfy the
>> principle of least surprise as well as simple English language meaning
>> of the word "all".
>>
>> perhaps there should be an option
>> --enable-g=important/most/devel/useful/sane that enables all of the
>> debug options that are reasonable for the "average hardcore user" /
>> developer.
>>
>> jeff
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 4:33 PM, Jeremiah Willcock
>> <jewillco at osl.iu.edu <mailto:jewillco at osl.iu.edu>> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 11 Mar 2013, Dave Goodell wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mar 11, 2013, at 3:36 PM CDT, Jeremiah Willcock
>>>> <jewillco at osl.iu.edu <mailto:jewillco at osl.iu.edu>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In MPICH 3.0.2, the help message for the --enable-g=all configure
>>>>> option
>>>>> states that it enables "All of the above choices", but in fact
>>>>> (according to
>>>>> configure.ac) it does not enable the "handle" or "memarena"
>>>>> debugging flags.
>>>>> Is that the intended behavior?  Thank you for your help.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The situation is unclear.  I just did a little bit of git
>>>> archaeology and
>>>> it looks like these flags were added prior to MPICH2-1.0.6, which is
>>>> as far
>>>> back as I can look without having to sift through ancient CVS
>>>> history.  The
>>>> pickaxe doesn't show any place where variables corresponding to
>>>> those flags
>>>> might have been removed from the "all|yes)" case.  It looks like just a
>>>> mistake or sloppiness on someone's part in the distant past.
>>>>
>>>> I'm not sure what the right "fix" is.  The "memarena" option actually
>>>> introduces quite a bit of overhead that we may not want enabled
>>>> casually.
>>>> The "handles" option is pretty lightweight, at least in stock MPICH.  I
>>>> suppose we could add both to the "all" option and then change the "yes"
>>>> option to be a set of reasonable defaults instead.
>>>>
>>>> Do you have a preference?  Or are you just observing a discrepancy?
>>>
>>>
>>> I was both observing a discrepancy and trying to debug something and was
>>> surprised that "all" didn't include "handles".
>>>
>>> -- Jeremiah Willcock
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> discuss mailing list discuss at mpich.org <mailto:discuss at mpich.org>
>>> To manage subscription options or unsubscribe:
>>> https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Jeff Hammond
>> Argonne Leadership Computing Facility
>> University of Chicago Computation Institute
>> jhammond at alcf.anl.gov <mailto:jhammond at alcf.anl.gov> / (630) 252-5381
>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/jeffhammond
>> https://wiki.alcf.anl.gov/parts/index.php/User:Jhammond
>> _______________________________________________
>> discuss mailing list     discuss at mpich.org
>> To manage subscription options or unsubscribe:
>> https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list     discuss at mpich.org
> To manage subscription options or unsubscribe:
> https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>