Skip to content

Introduce explicit initialization of AMS#138

Merged
koparasy merged 3 commits intodevelopfrom
features/static-initialization
Apr 14, 2025
Merged

Introduce explicit initialization of AMS#138
koparasy merged 3 commits intodevelopfrom
features/static-initialization

Conversation

@lpottier
Copy link
Member

Removed static initialization from AMS.
Introduced AMSInit and AMSFinalize that users will have to explicitly call to start using AMS. AMSInit also initializes the Resource Manager.

@koparasy One question is, do we want to manage the MPI initialization / Finalize in AMS? It might be better to let users initialize MPI as they want

@lpottier lpottier linked an issue Apr 12, 2025 that may be closed by this pull request
@lpottier lpottier requested a review from koparasy April 12, 2025 16:57
Copy link
Member

@koparasy koparasy left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM. Nits and please rebase before we merge.

@koparasy
Copy link
Member

@lpottier In principle AMS does not require MPI. We should leave the user to initialize MPI on their own.

…alize

Signed-off-by: Loic Pottier <pottier1@llnl.gov>
Signed-off-by: Loic Pottier <pottier1@llnl.gov>
Signed-off-by: Loic Pottier <pottier1@llnl.gov>
@lpottier lpottier force-pushed the features/static-initialization branch from 9e63d31 to dff43f5 Compare April 14, 2025 18:36
@koparasy koparasy merged commit dd2904c into develop Apr 14, 2025
9 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Moving away from static initialization

2 participants