[MacPorts] #43593: geant4: adding a variant for multithreading
#43593: geant4: adding a variant for multithreading -----------------------------+-------------------------------- Reporter: patrick.sizun@… | Owner: macports-tickets@… Type: enhancement | Status: new Priority: Low | Milestone: Component: ports | Version: 2.2.1 Keywords: | Port: geant4 -----------------------------+-------------------------------- Since release 10.0, Geant4 includes support for multi-threaded Geant4 applications. The attached patch would add a variant to enable this feature. -- Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/43593> MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/> Ports system for OS X
#43593: geant4: adding a variant for multithreading ------------------------------+---------------------- Reporter: patrick.sizun@… | Owner: mojca@… Type: enhancement | Status: new Priority: Low | Milestone: Component: ports | Version: 2.2.1 Resolution: | Keywords: haspatch Port: geant4 | ------------------------------+---------------------- Changes (by ryandesign@…): * cc: mojca (removed) * keywords: => haspatch * owner: macports-tickets@… => mojca@… Comment: Note that the Cc field requires complete email addresses, and that you should use the haspatch keyword when you are providing a patch. -- Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/43593#comment:1> MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/> Ports system for OS X
#43593: geant4: adding a variant for multithreading ------------------------------+---------------------- Reporter: patrick.sizun@… | Owner: mojca@… Type: enhancement | Status: new Priority: Low | Milestone: Component: ports | Version: 2.2.1 Resolution: | Keywords: haspatch Port: geant4 | ------------------------------+---------------------- Comment (by mojca@…): Just a few questions: is this only supported in 10.0 or also in 9.6 (9.5)? I need to check anyway, but maybe you know that already. Is there any penalty/drawback if multithreading gets supported by default and without any extra option? -- Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/43593#comment:2> MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/> Ports system for OS X
#43593: geant4: adding a variant for multithreading ------------------------------+---------------------- Reporter: patrick.sizun@… | Owner: mojca@… Type: enhancement | Status: new Priority: Low | Milestone: Component: ports | Version: 2.2.1 Resolution: | Keywords: haspatch Port: geant4 | ------------------------------+---------------------- Comment (by mojca@…): Sorry, you already answered the first question. I just need to make sure that the option is only enabled for 10.0 then. -- Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/43593#comment:3> MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/> Ports system for OS X
#43593: geant4: adding a variant for multithreading ------------------------------+---------------------- Reporter: patrick.sizun@… | Owner: mojca@… Type: enhancement | Status: new Priority: Low | Milestone: Component: ports | Version: 2.2.1 Resolution: | Keywords: haspatch Port: geant4 | ------------------------------+---------------------- Comment (by patrick.sizun@…): Replying to [comment:2 mojca@…]:
Is there any penalty/drawback if multithreading gets supported by default and without any extra option?
Not according to the release notes: ''Existing (or new sequential) applications can be built and run without code changes, on either a sequential and a multi-threading capable installation of Geant4 - provided, of course, that mandatory changes are made to address other migration issues.'' -- Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/43593#comment:4> MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/> Ports system for OS X
#43593: geant4: adding a variant for multithreading ------------------------------+---------------------- Reporter: patrick.sizun@… | Owner: mojca@… Type: enhancement | Status: new Priority: Low | Milestone: Component: ports | Version: 2.2.1 Resolution: | Keywords: haspatch Port: geant4 | ------------------------------+---------------------- Comment (by patrick.sizun@…): Replying to [comment:4 patrick.sizun@…]:
Replying to [comment:2 mojca@…]:
Is there any penalty/drawback if multithreading gets supported by default and without any extra option?
Not according to the release notes: ''Existing (or new sequential) applications can be built and run without code changes, on either a sequential and a multi-threading capable installation of Geant4 - provided, of course, that mandatory changes are made to address other migration issues.''
However, since ''the default build of Geant4 is sequential'', I think it would be best to do the same for the port for now and only enable the multi-threading if required by users. -- Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/43593#comment:5> MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/> Ports system for OS X
#43593: geant4: adding a variant for multithreading ------------------------------+---------------------- Reporter: patrick.sizun@… | Owner: mojca@… Type: enhancement | Status: new Priority: Low | Milestone: Component: ports | Version: 2.2.1 Resolution: | Keywords: haspatch Port: geant4 | ------------------------------+---------------------- Comment (by mf2k@…): I would suggest that the variant be called "threaded" to match other ports like tcl. -- Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/43593#comment:6> MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/> Ports system for OS X
#43593: geant4: adding a variant for multithreading ------------------------------+---------------------- Reporter: patrick.sizun@… | Owner: mojca@… Type: enhancement | Status: new Priority: Low | Milestone: Component: ports | Version: 2.2.1 Resolution: | Keywords: haspatch Port: geant4 | ------------------------------+---------------------- Comment (by mojca@…): Speaking about compatible variant names ... here's what a `grep` for `thread` returns in other port variants: {{{ boost: variant no_single description {Disable building single- threaded libraries} gauche: variant no_threads { configure.args-delete --enable- threads=pthreads } raxml: variant pthreads conflicts hybrid description {Pthreads implementation} cherokee: variant no_pthread description {Disable threading support} sbcl: variant threads description {Enable multi-threaded runtime using the Mach pthreads interface.} tcl: variant threads description {add multithreading support} yap: variant threads abinit: variant threads description {Build with support for multi- thread support (openMP)} openmpi: variant threads description {enable threads for MPI applications} wannier90: variant threads description {Build with threaded ATLAS} hdf5: variant threadsafe description {Enable threadsafety (experimental, fails unit-tests)} octopus: # variants: berkeleygw, openmp, threads (for fftw, atlas?), scalapack, arpack }}} Did you mean `+threads` or `+threaded` when talking about Tcl? Indeed the keyword `+threads` seems to be the winner, but it also looks like some ports might need some clean up to get rid of those `no_*` variants. -- Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/43593#comment:7> MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/> Ports system for OS X
#43593: geant4: adding a variant for multithreading ------------------------------+---------------------- Reporter: patrick.sizun@… | Owner: mojca@… Type: enhancement | Status: new Priority: Low | Milestone: Component: ports | Version: 2.2.1 Resolution: | Keywords: haspatch Port: geant4 | ------------------------------+---------------------- Comment (by mf2k@…): I'm guessing that my comment was the victim of auto-correct. :) "+threads" definitely is in line with most other ports and we should standardize on that variant name. -- Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/43593#comment:8> MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/> Ports system for OS X
#43593: geant4: adding a variant for multithreading ------------------------------+---------------------- Reporter: patrick.sizun@… | Owner: mojca@… Type: enhancement | Status: closed Priority: Low | Milestone: Component: ports | Version: Resolution: fixed | Keywords: haspatch Port: geant4 | ------------------------------+---------------------- Changes (by mojca@…): * status: new => closed * version: 2.2.1 => * resolution: => fixed Comment: Committed in r120014. -- Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/43593#comment:9> MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/> Ports system for OS X
participants (1)
-
MacPorts