Retain info references on public info dup #12847
Open
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
We need to keep the references when duplicating info through
MPI_Info_dup so that subsequent calls to MPI_Info_dup
see the same info entries.
Test case provided by Neil Fortner:
```C
#include <mpi.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#define ERROR(msg) \
do { \
printf(msg "\n"); \
exit(1); \
} while(0)
int main(void) {
MPI_Info info1 = MPI_INFO_NULL, info2 = MPI_INFO_NULL, info3 = MPI_INFO_NULL;
int nkeys1, nkeys2, nkeys3;
if (MPI_Info_create(&info1) != MPI_SUCCESS)
ERROR("MPI_Info_create failed");
if (MPI_Info_set(info1, "custom_key", "custom_value") != MPI_SUCCESS)
ERROR("MPI_Info_set failed");
if (MPI_Info_get_nkeys(info1, &nkeys1) != MPI_SUCCESS)
ERROR("MPI_Info_get_nkeys(info1, &nkeys1) failed");
if (MPI_Info_dup(info1, &info2) != MPI_SUCCESS)
ERROR("MPI_Info_dup failed");
if (MPI_Info_free(&info1) != MPI_SUCCESS)
ERROR("MPI_Info_free(&info1) failed");
if (MPI_Info_get_nkeys(info2, &nkeys2) != MPI_SUCCESS)
ERROR("MPI_Info_get_nkeys(info2, &nkeys2) failed");
if (nkeys1 != nkeys2)
ERROR("Number of keys on duplicated MPI info object does not match that on original");
if (MPI_Info_dup(info2, &info3) != MPI_SUCCESS)
ERROR("MPI_Info_dup failed");
if (MPI_Info_free(&info2) != MPI_SUCCESS)
ERROR("MPI_Info_free(&info2) failed");
if (MPI_Info_get_nkeys(info3, &nkeys3) != MPI_SUCCESS)
ERROR("MPI_Info_get_nkeys(info3, &nkeys3) failed");
if (nkeys1 != nkeys3)
ERROR("Number of keys on double duplicated MPI info object does not match that on original");
if (MPI_Info_free(&info3) != MPI_SUCCESS)
ERROR("MPI_Info_free(&info3) failed");
printf("test passed\n");
return 0;
}
```
Signed-off-by: Joseph Schuchart <joseph.schuchart@stonybrook.edu>
|
@devreal I plan to add running the HDF5 testsuite to the ompi CI through a github action, that should cover this testcase as well. |
bosilca
reviewed
Oct 7, 2024
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why the name change for the public_only argument ? I find the old naming more clear.
You don't need to check for public, at that point in the code it doesn't matter anymore. Moreover, while trying to understand the code I don't even see that's the need for ie_referenced, as all set entries have it set. Are you seeing a case where this field is not set ?
|
I can confirm btw. that this PR fixes the issue #12742 , i.e. the HDF5 testphdf5 test is passing again |
bosilca
reviewed
Oct 9, 2024
| @@ -69,19 +69,24 @@ OBJ_CLASS_INSTANCE(opal_info_entry_t, opal_list_item_t, info_entry_constructor, | |||
| * key-value pairs that are not internal and that had been referenced, | |||
| * either through opal_info_get or opal_info_set. | |||
| */ | |||
| static int opal_info_dup_impl(opal_info_t *info, opal_info_t **newinfo, bool public_only) | |||
| static int opal_info_dup_impl(opal_info_t *info, opal_info_t **newinfo, bool public) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| static int opal_info_dup_impl(opal_info_t *info, opal_info_t **newinfo, bool public) | |
| static int opal_info_dup_impl(opal_info_t *info, opal_info_t **newinfo, bool public_only) |
| { | ||
| opal_info_entry_t *iterator; | ||
|
|
||
| OPAL_THREAD_LOCK(info->i_lock); | ||
| OPAL_LIST_FOREACH (iterator, &info->super, opal_info_entry_t) { | ||
| /* skip keys that are internal if we didn't ask for them */ | ||
| if (public_only && (iterator->ie_internal || iterator->ie_referenced == 0)) continue; | ||
| if (public && (iterator->ie_internal || iterator->ie_referenced == 0)) continue; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| if (public && (iterator->ie_internal || iterator->ie_referenced == 0)) continue; | |
| if (public_only && (iterator->ie_internal || iterator->ie_referenced == 0)) continue; |
| /* create a new info entry and retain the string objects */ | ||
| opal_info_entry_t *newentry = OBJ_NEW(opal_info_entry_t); | ||
| newentry->ie_key = iterator->ie_key; | ||
| OBJ_RETAIN(iterator->ie_key); | ||
| newentry->ie_value = iterator->ie_value; | ||
| if (public) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| if (public) { | |
| if (public_only) { |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
We need to keep the references when duplicating info through MPI_Info_dup so that subsequent calls to MPI_Info_dup see the same info entries.
Test case below was provided by Neil Fortner. Is there a way to add this test to the test harness?