\subsection faq_SG_DAG How to implement a distributed dynamic scheduler of DAGs.
Distributed is somehow "contagious". If you start making distributed
-decisions, there is no way to handle DAGs directly anymore (unless I am
-missing something). You have to encode your DAGs in term of communicating
-process to make the whole scheduling process distributed. Believe me, it is
-worth the effort since you'll then be able to try your algorithms in a very
-wide variety of conditions. Here is an example of how you could do that.
-Assume T1 has to be done before T2.
+decisions, there is no way to handle DAGs directly anymore (unless I
+am missing something). You have to encode your DAGs in term of
+communicating process to make the whole scheduling process
+distributed. Here is an example of how you could do that. Assume T1
+has to be done before T2.
\verbatim
int your_agent(int argc, char *argv[] {
\endverbatim
If you decide that the distributed part is not that much important and that
-DAG is really the level of abstraction you want to work with (but it
-prevents you from having "realistic" platform modeling), then you should
-keep using the 2.18.5 versions until somebody has ported SG on top of SURF.
-Note however that SURF will be slower than the old SG to handle traces with
-a lots of variations (there is no trace integration anymore).
+DAG is really the level of abstraction you want to work with, then you should
+give a try to \ref SD_API.
\section faq_dynamic Dynamic resources and platform building
before the client get a chance to read them (use gras_os_sleep() to delay
the server), or the server died awfully before the client got the data.
+\subsection faq_valgrind Valgrind spits tons of errors!
+
+It may happen that valgrind, the memory debugger beloved by any decent C
+programmer, spits tons of warnings like the following :
+\verbatim ==8414== Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s)
+==8414== at 0x400882D: (within /lib/ld-2.3.6.so)
+==8414== by 0x414EDE9: (within /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc-2.3.6.so)
+==8414== by 0x400B105: (within /lib/ld-2.3.6.so)
+==8414== by 0x414F937: _dl_open (in /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc-2.3.6.so)
+==8414== by 0x4150F4C: (within /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc-2.3.6.so)
+==8414== by 0x400B105: (within /lib/ld-2.3.6.so)
+==8414== by 0x415102D: __libc_dlopen_mode (in /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc-2.3.6.so)
+==8414== by 0x412D6B9: backtrace (in /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc-2.3.6.so)
+==8414== by 0x8076446: xbt_dictelm_get_ext (dict_elm.c:714)
+==8414== by 0x80764C1: xbt_dictelm_get (dict_elm.c:732)
+==8414== by 0x8079010: xbt_cfg_register (config.c:208)
+==8414== by 0x806821B: MSG_config (msg_config.c:42)
+\endverbatim
+
+This problem is somewhere in the libc when using the backtraces and there is
+very few things we can do ourselves to fix it. Instead, here is how to tell
+valgrind to ignore the error. Add the following to your ~/.valgrind.supp (or
+create this file on need). Make sure to change the obj line according to
+your personnal mileage (change 2.3.6 to the actual version you are using,
+which you can retrieve with a simple "ls /lib/ld*.so").
+
+\verbatim {
+ name: Backtrace madness
+ Memcheck:Cond
+ obj:/lib/ld-2.3.6.so
+ fun:dl_open_worker
+ fun:_dl_open
+ fun:do_dlopen
+ fun:dlerror_run
+ fun:__libc_dlopen_mode
+}\endverbatim
+
+Then, you have to specify valgrind to use this suppression file by passing
+the <tt>--suppressions=$HOME/.valgrind.supp</tt> option on the command line.
+You can also add the following to your ~/.bashrc so that it gets passed
+automatically. Actually, it passes a bit more options to valgrind, and this
+happen to be my personnal settings. Check the valgrind documentation for
+more information.
+
+\verbatim export VALGRIND_OPTS="--leak-check=yes --leak-resolution=high --num-callers=40 --tool=memcheck --suppressions=$HOME/.valgrind.supp" \endverbatim
\subsection faq_deadlock There is a deadlock !!!
