[codes-ross-users] codes model net problems

[Jenkins, Jonathan P.]

Hi Yu,

You are correct that modelnet LPs with different annotations shouldn't be able to communicate through the modelnet interface. Can you send us the configuration file you are using, along with the net_id, annotation, final_dest_lp, and sender->gid values for the call that misbehaves? We'll try to reproduce on our end.

The startup parameter in simplenet represents local sender-side overhead on a packet granularity. So one way to estimate the startup is to get an average per-call time (on the sender side) of very small (word-sized) messages. I.e. measure calling send(fd, buf, 8, flags) 1M times and take the average.

Thanks,
John

From: <codes-ross-users-bounces at lists.mcs.anl.gov> on behalf of 于雷（Yu Lei） <yulei at buaa.edu.cn>
Date: Thursday, August 4, 2016 at 10:34 PM
To: "codes-ross-users at lists.mcs.anl.gov" <codes-ross-users at lists.mcs.anl.gov>
Subject: [codes-ross-users] codes model net problems


1/for the method:

model_net_event_return model_net_event_annotated(
        int net_id,
        char const * annotation,
        char const * category,
        tw_lpid final_dest_lp,
        uint64_t message_size,
        tw_stime offset,
        int remote_event_size,
        void const * remote_event,
        int self_event_size,
        void const * self_event,
        tw_lp *sender);



we think that two lps with same network type but with different annotation can not communicate with this method. But we do some tests which prove that the communication can be established. We don't know why?

2/for simplenet model, it needs a parameter "start_up". How can we obtain this parameter?



Thanks,



Lei
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/codes-ross-users/attachments/20160805/54559bd4/attachment-0001.html>