Open MPI logo

Open MPI Development Mailing List Archives

  |   Home   |   Support   |   FAQ   |   all Development mailing list

From: Jeff Squyres (jsquyres_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-08-31 14:06:16


On Aug 29, 2005, at 9:17 PM, Brad Penoff wrote:

>> PML: Pretty much the same as it was described in the paper. Its
>> interface is basically MPI semantics (i.e., it sits right under
>> MPI_SEND and the rest).
>>
>> BTL: Byte Transfer Layer; it's the next generation of PTL. The
>> BTL is
>> much more simple than the PTL, and removes all vestigaes of any MPI
>> semantics that still lived in the PTL. It's a very simple byte mover
>> layer, intended to make it quite easy to implement new network
>> interfaces.
>
> I was curious about what you meant by the removal of MPI
> semantics. Do
> you mean it simply has no notion of tags, ranks, etc? In other words,
> does it simply put the data into some sort of format so that the
> PML can
> operate on with its own state machine?

I don't recall the details (it's been quite a while since I looked at
the PTL), but there was some semblance of MPI semantics that creeped
down into the PTL interface itself. The BTL has none of that -- it's
purely a byte mover.

> Also, say you had some underlying protocol that allowed unordered
> delivery
> of data (so not fully ordered like TCP); which "layer" would the
> notion of
> "order" be handled in? I'm guessing PML would need some sort of
> sequence
> number attached to it; is that right?

Correct. That was in the PML in the 2nd gen stuff and is still at
the PML in the 3rd gen stuff.

>> BML: BTL Management Layer; this used to be part of the PML but we
>> recently split it off into its own framework. It's mainly the
>> utility
>> gorp of managing multiple BTL modules in a single process. This was
>> done because when working with the next generation of collectives,
>> MPI-2 IO, and MPI-2 one sided operations, we want to have the ability
>> to use the PML (which the collectives do today, for example) or to be
>> able to dive right down and directly use the BTLs (i.e., cut out a
>> little latency).
>
> In the cases where the BML is required, does it cost extra memcpy's?

Not to my knowledge. Galen -- can you fill in the details of this
question and the rest of Brad's questions?

Thanks!

-- 
{+} Jeff Squyres
{+} The Open MPI Project
{+} http://www.open-mpi.org/