Skip to content

Update umfOpenIPCHandle API to use IPC handler instead of pool #960

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Dec 5, 2024

Conversation

vinser52
Copy link
Contributor

@vinser52 vinser52 commented Dec 3, 2024

Description

As we agreed on the UMF technical meeting, this PR introduces umf_ipc_handler_handle_t that is used by the umfOpenIPCHandle function instead of pool handle to open the IPC handle. In current implementation the umf_ipc_handler_handle_t is just a memory provider handle to the tracking provider instance.

Checklist

  • Code compiles without errors locally
  • All tests pass locally
  • CI workflows execute properly

@vinser52 vinser52 requested review from bratpiorka and lplewa December 4, 2024 09:38
@lukaszstolarczuk lukaszstolarczuk changed the title Update umfOpenIPCHandle API to use IPC handler isntead of pool Update umfOpenIPCHandle API to use IPC handler instead of pool Dec 4, 2024
@bratpiorka
Copy link
Contributor

should this be ready for review?

@vinser52
Copy link
Contributor Author

vinser52 commented Dec 4, 2024

should this be ready for review?

The code part is ready, but I also want to update the examples.rst file in this PR.

@vinser52
Copy link
Contributor Author

vinser52 commented Dec 4, 2024

The umfPoolByPtr implementation will be updated in a separate PR.

@vinser52 vinser52 marked this pull request as ready for review December 4, 2024 11:47
@vinser52 vinser52 requested a review from a team as a code owner December 4, 2024 11:47
@vinser52 vinser52 requested a review from lplewa December 4, 2024 13:23
@vinser52 vinser52 requested a review from ldorau December 5, 2024 00:17
@lplewa
Copy link
Contributor

lplewa commented Dec 5, 2024

Do we need it on 0.10 branch?
If yes please change target branch on this PR and then rebase to 0.10 branch(in this order)

@vinser52
Copy link
Contributor Author

vinser52 commented Dec 5, 2024

Do we need it on 0.10 branch?
If yes please change target branch on this PR and then rebase to 0.10 branch(in this order)

Yes, we need. I will rebase.

How do the changes then go to the main branch? Will they be merged automatically or do I need separate PR?

@vinser52 vinser52 changed the base branch from main to v0.10.x December 5, 2024 12:54
@lplewa
Copy link
Contributor

lplewa commented Dec 5, 2024

we do PR from 0.10 to main. Like this one:#959

@vinser52
Copy link
Contributor Author

vinser52 commented Dec 5, 2024

we do PR from 0.10 to main. Like this one:#959

Who will do that? Should I do that, or someone from your team do it from time to time?

@lukaszstolarczuk
Copy link
Contributor

we do PR from 0.10 to main. Like this one:#959

Who will do that? Should I do that, or someone from your team do it from time to time?

Yeah, I do it from time to time, or when need to include a specific patch to the main

@lukaszstolarczuk lukaszstolarczuk merged commit 66b161a into oneapi-src:v0.10.x Dec 5, 2024
77 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.

5 participants