Open MPI logo

Open MPI Development Mailing List Archives

  |   Home   |   Support   |   FAQ   |   all Development mailing list

Subject: Re: [OMPI devel] RFC: Eliminate ompi/class/ompi_[circular_buffer_]fifo.h
From: Ralph Castain (rhc_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-02-12 18:09:59


The connection is only that, if you are going to modify the sm BTL as
you say, you might at least want to be aware that we have a problem in
it so you (a) don't make it worse than it already is, and (b) might
keep an eye open for the problem as you are changing things.

On Feb 12, 2009, at 3:58 PM, Eugene Loh wrote:

> Sorry, what's the connection? Are we talking about https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/ompi/ticket/1791
> ? Are you simply saying that if I'm doing some sm BTL work, I
> should also look at 1791? I'm trying to figure out if there's some
> more specific connection I'm missing.
>
> Ralph Castain wrote:
>
>> You might want to look at ticket #1791 while you are doing this -
>> Brad added some valuable data earlier today.
>>
>> On Feb 12, 2009, at 12:13 PM, Eugene Loh wrote:
>>
>>> Jeff Squyres wrote:
>>>
>>>> This should probably include the disclaimer that we talked about
>>>> this extensively yesterday at the sm/btl meeting after the MPI
>>>> Forum meeting in San Jose.
>>>>
>>>> Eugene has been working on new sm stuff (as he has posted), and
>>>> we had a very productive meeting yesterday discussing what he
>>>> has done and how to get it all into the trunk. Have a look at
>>>> his slides at the bottom of this wiki page:
>>>>
>>>> https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/ompi/wiki/Feb09Meetingsjc
>>>>
>>>> Eugene will be replacing the current sm btl with a new one
>>>
>>>
>>> Let's downgrade that statement. I intend to make a series of
>>> putbacks to the current sm BTL to improve latency. I'm not so
>>> much "replacing" the current BTL as doing some optimization work.
>>>
>>>> that uses a single queue and various other improvements.
>>>> Hence, the current ompi_*fifo.h files will no longer be
>>>> necessary. Additionally, we resolved the "abstraction break"
>>>> issues that were discussed here on the list a little while ago
>>>> -- we think all the improvements can be done in the current
>>>> architecture without disrupting the abstraction barriers. This
>>>> RFC is one step in the process; eliminate some no- longer-
>>>> necessary kruft.
>>>>
>>>> On Feb 12, 2009, at 8:53 AM, Eugene Loh wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> RFC: Eliminate ompi/class/ompi_[circular_buffer_]fifo.h
>>>>>
>>>>> WHAT: Eliminate those two include files.
>>>>>
>>>>> WHY: These include files are only used by the sm BTL. They
>>>>> are not generally usable. Further, the sm BTL will soon no
>>>>> longer use them. The current FIFOs support only a single sender
>>>>> each and we want multiple senders to be able to share a common
>>>>> FIFO. The current FIFOs also can grow without bound, which is
>>>>> complicated support that we don't think we need.
>>>>>
>>>>> WHERE: Two include files: ompi/class/
>>>>> ompi_[circular_buffer_]fifo.h
>>>>>
>>>>> WHEN: "Immediately". Intended for 1.3.x.
>>>>>
>>>>> TIMEOUT: February 20, 2009.
>>>>
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list
> devel_at_[hidden]
> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel