Open MPI logo

Open MPI Development Mailing List Archives

  |   Home   |   Support   |   FAQ   |   all Development mailing list

Subject: Re: [OMPI devel] Question about barrier()
From: ananda.mudar_at_[hidden]
Date: 2010-11-02 10:11:38


Jeff

 

Yes, I am calling MPI_Init_thread() with MPI_THREAD_MULTIPLE. And I have
enabled thread and mpi_threads while configuring OpenMPI. BTW, I am
using OpenMPI 1.4.2.

 

It will be helpful to know if this is a design constraint or some
implementation defect.

 

Regards

Ananda

 

Ananda B Mudar, PMP

Senior Technical Architect

Wipro Technologies

Ph: 972 765 8093

ananda.mudar_at_[hidden]

 

Subject: Re: [OMPI devel] Question about barrier()
From: Jeff Squyres (jsquyres_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-11-02 09:53:53

* Previous message: Jeff Squyres: "Re: [OMPI devel] === CREATE
FAILURE (trunk) ==="
<http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/devel/2010/11/8651.php>
* In reply to: ananda.mudar_at_[hidden]: "[OMPI devel] Question
about barrier()"
<http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/devel/2010/11/8650.php>

________________________________

I'd have to check to be sure, but I'm pretty sure that it's because
we've activated lots of locks that aren't there in single-threaded mode.

I say this because I *assume* you mean that when you use
MPI_INIT_THREAD, you mean that you're actually calling it with
MPI_THREAD_MULTIPLE. Calling MPI_INIT should be exactly equivalent to
calling MPI_INIT_THREAD with MPI_THREAD_SINGLE.

On Nov 1, 2010, at 12:46 PM, <ananda.mudar_at_[hidden]>
<ananda.mudar_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> Hi
>
> I have the following small program where the rank-0 process does sleep
and then all the processes perform barrier().
> #include "mpi.h"
> #include <stdio.h>
> int main(int argc, char *argv[])
> {
> int rank, nprocs;
>
> MPI_Init(&argc,&argv);
> MPI_Comm_size(MPI_COMM_WORLD,&nprocs);
> MPI_Comm_rank(MPI_COMM_WORLD,&rank);
> if ( rank == 0) sleep(60);
> MPI_Barrier(MPI_COMM_WORLD);
> printf("Hello, world. I am %d of %d\n", rank, nprocs);fflush(stdout);
> MPI_Finalize();
> return 0;
> }
>
> When I run this program on two nodes consuming 16 cores, I see that
the non rank-0 processes which are in wait mode for rank-0 process to
complete barrier() are consuming only user time. I was expecting this
behavior and there are no questions about it.
>
> However if I initialize MPI threads by replacing MPI_Init() with
MPI_Init_thread(), I see quite a different behavior of this program.
While rank-0 process is sleeping, all non rank-0 processes seem to be
spending time in kernel mode (thus increasing system time) instead of
waiting in user mode.
>
> Following is the sar output on the node where rank-0 process is
running
> Node1> sar 2 10
> Linux 2.6.18-128.1.10.el5-perfctr (Node1) 10/29/2010
>
> 02:33:51 PM CPU %user %nice %system %iowait %steal %idle
> 02:33:53 PM all 6.69 0.00 80.88 0.00 0.00 12.44
> 02:33:55 PM all 6.56 0.00 81.00 0.00 0.00 12.44
> 02:33:57 PM all 6.62 0.00 80.89 0.00 0.00 12.49
> 02:33:59 PM all 6.68 0.00 80.89 0.00 0.00 12.43
> 02:34:01 PM all 6.69 0.00 81.00 0.00 0.00 12.31
> 02:34:03 PM all 6.75 0.00 80.76 0.00 0.00 12.49
> 02:34:05 PM all 6.75 0.00 80.82 0.00 0.00 12.43
> 02:34:07 PM all 6.75 0.00 81.19 0.00 0.00 12.06
> 02:34:09 PM all 6.93 0.00 80.64 0.00 0.00 12.43
> 02:34:11 PM all 6.75 0.00 80.81 0.00 0.00 12.44
> Average: all 6.72 0.00 80.89 0.00 0.00 12.40
>
> And following is the sar output on the second node:
> Node2> sar 2 10
> Linux 2.6.18-128.1.10.el5-perfctr (Node2) 10/29/2010
>
> 02:33:48 PM CPU %user %nice %system %iowait %steal %idle
> 02:33:50 PM all 6.37 0.00 93.63 0.00 0.00 0.00
> 02:33:52 PM all 6.19 0.00 93.81 0.00 0.00 0.00
> 02:33:54 PM all 6.31 0.00 93.69 0.00 0.00 0.00
> 02:33:56 PM all 6.50 0.00 93.50 0.00 0.00 0.00
> 02:33:58 PM all 6.81 0.00 93.19 0.00 0.00 0.00
> 02:34:00 PM all 6.56 0.00 93.44 0.00 0.00 0.00
> 02:34:02 PM all 6.50 0.00 93.50 0.00 0.00 0.00
> 02:34:04 PM all 6.50 0.00 93.50 0.00 0.00 0.00
> 02:34:06 PM all 6.56 0.00 93.44 0.00 0.00 0.00
> 02:34:08 PM all 6.68 0.00 93.32 0.00 0.00 0.00
> Average: all 6.50 0.00 93.50 0.00 0.00 0.00
>
> Can someone please explain the difference in behavior of barrier()
call when I use MPI_Init() vs MPI_Init_thread()?
>
> Thanks
> Ananda
>
> Ananda B Mudar, PMP
> Senior Technical Architect
> Wipro Technologies
> Ph: 972 765 8093 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting 972 765
8093 end_of_the_skype_highlighting
> ananda.mudar_at_[hidden]
>
> Please do not print this email unless it is absolutely necessary.
>
> The information contained in this electronic message and any
attachments to this message are intended for the exclusive use of the
addressee(s) and may contain proprietary, confidential or privileged
information. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not
disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender
immediately and destroy all copies of this message and any attachments.
>
> WARNING: Computer viruses can be transmitted via email. The recipient
should check this email and any attachments for the presence of viruses.
The company accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus
transmitted by this email.
>
> www.wipro.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list
> devel_at_[hidden]
> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel

-- 
Jeff Squyres
jsquyres_at_[hidden]
For corporate legal information go to:
http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/
________________________________
Please do not print this email unless it is absolutely necessary. 

The information contained in this electronic message and any attachments to this message are intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s) and may contain proprietary, confidential or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately and destroy all copies of this message and any attachments. 

WARNING: Computer viruses can be transmitted via email. The recipient should check this email and any attachments for the presence of viruses. The company accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email. 

www.wipro.com