On Jul 30, 2014, at 18:00 , Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) <jsquyres_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> WHAT: Should we make the job size (i.e., initial number of procs) available in OPAL?
> WHY: At least 2 BTLs are using this info (*more below)
> WHERE: usnic and ugni
> TIMEOUT: there's already been some inflammatory emails about this; let's discuss next Tuesday on the teleconf: Tue, 5 Aug 2014
> MORE DETAIL:
> This is an open question. We *have* the information at the time that the BTLs are initialized: do we allow that information to go down to OPAL?
> Ralph added this info down in OPAL in r32355, but George reverted it in r32361.
> Points for: YES, WE SHOULD
> +++ 2 BTLs were using it (usinc, ugni)
> +++ Other RTE job-related info are already in OPAL (num local ranks, local rank)
> Points for: NO, WE SHOULD NOT
> --- What exactly is this number (e.g., num currently-connected procs?), and when is it updated?
> --- We need to precisely delineate what belongs in OPAL vs. above-OPAL
--- Using this information to configure the communication environment limits the scope of communication substrate to a static application (in number of participants). Under this assumption, one can simply wait until the first add_proc to compute the number of processes, solution as correct as the current one.
The other global information that were made available in OPAL (num_local_peers and my_local_rank) are only used by local BTL (SM, SMCUDA and VADER). Moreover, my_local_rank is only used to decide who initialize the backend file, thing that can easily be done using an atomic operation. The number of local processes is used to prevent SM from activating itself if we dont have at least 2 processes per node. So, their usage is minimally invasive, and can eventually be phased out with a little effort.
> FWIW: here's how ompi_process_info.num_procs was used before the BTL move down to OPAL:
> - usnic: for a minor latency optimization / sizing of a shared receive buffer queue length, and for the initial size of a peer lookup hash
> - ugni: to determine the size of the per-peer buffers used for send/recv communication
> Jeff Squyres
> For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/
> devel mailing list
> Subscription: http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
> Link to this post: http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/devel/2014/07/15373.php