Open MPI logo

MTT Devel Mailing List Archives

  |   Home   |   Support   |   FAQ   |   all MTT Devel mailing list

Subject: Re: [MTT devel] Extracting transparent data from OMPI
From: Ethan Mallove (ethan.mallove_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-02-06 11:32:55


On Wed, Feb/06/2008 10:54:05AM, Josh Hursey wrote:
>
> On Feb 6, 2008, at 10:25 AM, Jeff Squyres wrote:
>
> > On Jan 31, 2008, at 5:07 PM, Josh Hursey wrote:
> >
> >> For the visualization it would be really nice to see how well
> >> tested a
> >> particular interconnect, resource manager, and/or 'feature' is when
> >> ramping up to a release. However these peices of information are hard
> >> to obtain, and in some cases quantify (e.g., what do we mean by
> >> testing a 'feature'?).
> >>
> >> Thinking about this it occurred to me that what we really need is for
> >> OMPI to tell MTT what it is doing for some of these cases.
> >> Two examples, MTT cannot tell:
> >> - which set of compile time options are enabled/disabled
> >> automatically
> >> e.g. [ "./configure --with-foo" vs "./configure"]
> >
> > Yes, this could be done.
> >
> >
> >> - which BTL(s) or MTL are used to run a test
> >> e.g. [ "mpirun -mca btl tcp,self foo" vs. "mpirun foo"]
> >
> > Don't we offer this in a limited way right now with the "network"
> > field in the MPI details section? I think we hesitated to put OMPI-
> > specific semantics on that field -- e.g., whether you're using the MX
> > BTL or MTL is an OMPI issue; you're still using the MX protocol/
> > network.
> >
> > I suppose we could agument those strings in the OMPI case: mx:mtl and
> > mx:btl, for example.
> >
> > So to be clear: does the network field not give you what you need?
>
> The network field gives us exactly what we want. The problem is that
> it is not filled in when we run "mpirun foo" since we do not specify
> the BTLs on the command line (unless the INI explicitly specifies it).
> The problems becomes further complicated when you run something like
> "mpirun -mca btl openib,tcp,self" where the 'tcp' BTL is not going to
> be used due to exclusivity (at least that is what I'm told), so we
> miss report the BTLs used in this case.
>
> >
> >
> >> For the configure options we *could* parse the config.log to extract
> >> this data. The question is, if we did this, what do we want to look?
> >> And is this something we want to do? Is there another way?
> >
> > I think having a network-like field for the MPI install section might
> > be good, and possibly have an OMPI:: funclet to automatically do the
> > parsing. But we need to be mindful of MPIs that won't have a
> > configure script, so what information goes there might be dubious (or
> > just empty?).
>
> Yeah I think an Open MPI specific function should do the parsing since
> the configure options we want to grab will be specific to Open MPI. I
> think in the case of no configure script it would just be empty.
>

The info we are looking for in config.log is not available
in ompi_info? Parsing config.log throws a monkey wrench into
an AlreadyInstalled testing scenario.

-Ethan

> >
> >
> >>
> >> For the BTL(s)/MTL this is a much more subtle question since this
> >> depends on the connectivity of the interfaces on a machine, and the
> >> runtime selection logic. If we added a parameter to mpirun (e.g. "--
> >> showme connectivity") that displayed connectivity information to
> >> stdout (or a file) would this be useful? What should it look like?
> >
> > Ya, this is on my to-do list. IB CM stuff in the openib BTL has been
> > consuming my time recently (much more complicated than I originally
> > thought); I swear I'll be getting to the connectivity map issue before
> > v1.3...
>
> Is there a bug about this somewhere? There is a slim chance that I
> (maybe Tim P) could help with this effort as well in the near term
> (next month). For the simple case we could just dump the connectivity
> information from Rank 0, then the more complex case will be full
> mapping.
>
> -- Josh
>
> >
> >
> >>
> >> We have talked about some of this in the past, but I could not find a
> >> Bug talking about it in MTT.
> >>
> >> What do you think about this?
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Josh
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> mtt-devel mailing list
> >> mtt-devel_at_[hidden]
> >> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mtt-devel
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jeff Squyres
> > Cisco Systems
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > mtt-devel mailing list
> > mtt-devel_at_[hidden]
> > http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mtt-devel
>
> _______________________________________________
> mtt-devel mailing list
> mtt-devel_at_[hidden]
> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mtt-devel