Open MPI logo

Open MPI User's Mailing List Archives

  |   Home   |   Support   |   FAQ   |  

This web mail archive is frozen.

This page is part of a frozen web archive of this mailing list.

You can still navigate around this archive, but know that no new mails have been added to it since July of 2016.

Click here to be taken to the new web archives of this list; it includes all the mails that are in this frozen archive plus all new mails that have been sent to the list since it was migrated to the new archives.

Subject: Re: [OMPI users] 1.3.1 -rf rankfile behaviour ??
From: Anton Starikov (ant.starikov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-05-12 01:27:40


Now there is another problem :)

You can try oversubscribe node. At least by 1 task.
If you hostfile and rank file limit you at N procs, you can ask mpirun
for N+1 and it wil be not rejected.
Although in reality there will be N tasks.
So, if your hostfile limit is 4, then "mpirun -np 4" and "mpirun -np
5" both works, but in both cases there are only 4 tasks. It isn't
crucial, because there is nor real oversubscription, but there is
still some bug which can affect something in future.

--
Anton Starikov.
On May 12, 2009, at 1:45 AM, Ralph Castain wrote:
> This is fixed as of r21208.
>
> Thanks for reporting it!
> Ralph
>
>
> On May 11, 2009, at 12:51 PM, Anton Starikov wrote:
>
>> Although removing this check solves problem of having more slots in  
>> rankfile than necessary, there is another problem.
>>
>> If I set rmaps_base_no_oversubscribe=1 then if, for example:
>>
>>
>> hostfile:
>>
>> node01
>> node01
>> node02
>> node02
>>
>> rankfile:
>>
>> rank 0=node01 slot=1
>> rank 1=node01 slot=0
>> rank 2=node02 slot=1
>> rank 3=node02 slot=0
>>
>> mpirun -np 4 ./something
>>
>> complains with:
>>
>> "There are not enough slots available in the system to satisfy the  
>> 4 slots
>> that were requested by the application"
>>
>> but "mpirun -np 3 ./something" will work though. It works, when you  
>> ask for 1 CPU less. And the same behavior in any case (shared  
>> nodes, non-shared nodes, multi-node)
>>
>> If you switch off rmaps_base_no_oversubscribe, then it works and  
>> all affinities set as it requested in rankfile, there is no  
>> oversubscription.
>>
>>
>> Anton.
>>
>> On May 5, 2009, at 3:08 PM, Ralph Castain wrote:
>>
>>> Ah - thx for catching that, I'll remove that check. It no longer  
>>> is required.
>>>
>>> Thx!
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 7:04 AM, Lenny Verkhovsky <lenny.verkhovsky_at_[hidden] 
>>> > wrote:
>>> According to the code it does cares.
>>>
>>> $vi orte/mca/rmaps/rank_file/rmaps_rank_file.c +572
>>>
>>> ival = orte_rmaps_rank_file_value.ival;
>>> if ( ival > (np-1) ) {
>>> orte_show_help("help-rmaps_rank_file.txt", "bad-rankfile", true,  
>>> ival, rankfile);
>>> rc = ORTE_ERR_BAD_PARAM;
>>> goto unlock;
>>> }
>>>
>>> If I remember correctly, I used an array to map ranks, and since  
>>> the length of array is NP, maximum index must be less than np, so  
>>> if you have the number of rank > NP, you have no place to put it  
>>> inside array.
>>>
>>> "Likewise, if you have more procs than the rankfile specifies, we  
>>> map the additional procs either byslot (default) or bynode (if you  
>>> specify that option). So the rankfile doesn't need to contain an  
>>> entry for every proc."  - Correct point.
>>>
>>>
>>> Lenny.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 5/5/09, Ralph Castain <rhc_at_[hidden]> wrote: Sorry Lenny,  
>>> but that isn't correct. The rankfile mapper doesn't care if the  
>>> rankfile contains additional info - it only maps up to the number  
>>> of processes, and ignores anything beyond that number. So there is  
>>> no need to remove the additional info.
>>>
>>> Likewise, if you have more procs than the rankfile specifies, we  
>>> map the additional procs either byslot (default) or bynode (if you  
>>> specify that option). So the rankfile doesn't need to contain an  
>>> entry for every proc.
>>>
>>> Just don't want to confuse folks.
>>> Ralph
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 5:59 AM, Lenny Verkhovsky <lenny.verkhovsky_at_[hidden] 
>>> > wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> maximum rank number must be less then np.
>>> if np=1 then there is only rank 0 in the system, so rank 1 is  
>>> invalid.
>>> please remove "rank 1=node2 slot=*" from the rankfile
>>> Best regards,
>>> Lenny.
>>>
>>> On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 11:14 AM, Geoffroy Pignot <geopignot_at_[hidden] 
>>> > wrote:
>>> Hi ,
>>>
>>> I got the openmpi-1.4a1r21095.tar.gz tarball, but unfortunately my  
>>> command doesn't work
>>>
>>> cat rankf:
>>> rank 0=node1 slot=*
>>> rank 1=node2 slot=*
>>>
>>> cat hostf:
>>> node1 slots=2
>>> node2 slots=2
>>>
>>> mpirun  --rankfile rankf --hostfile hostf  --host node1 -n 1  
>>> hostname : --host node2 -n 1 hostname
>>>
>>> Error, invalid rank (1) in the rankfile (rankf)
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> [r011n006:28986] [[45541,0],0] ORTE_ERROR_LOG: Bad parameter in  
>>> file rmaps_rank_file.c at line 403
>>> [r011n006:28986] [[45541,0],0] ORTE_ERROR_LOG: Bad parameter in  
>>> file base/rmaps_base_map_job.c at line 86
>>> [r011n006:28986] [[45541,0],0] ORTE_ERROR_LOG: Bad parameter in  
>>> file base/plm_base_launch_support.c at line 86
>>> [r011n006:28986] [[45541,0],0] ORTE_ERROR_LOG: Bad parameter in  
>>> file plm_rsh_module.c at line 1016
>>>
>>>
>>> Ralph, could you tell me if my command syntax is correct or not ?  
>>> if not, give me the expected one ?
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Geoffroy
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2009/4/30 Geoffroy Pignot <geopignot_at_[hidden]>
>>>
>>> Immediately Sir !!! :)
>>>
>>> Thanks again Ralph
>>>
>>> Geoffroy
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>>
>>> Message: 2
>>> Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2009 06:45:39 -0600
>>> From: Ralph Castain <rhc_at_[hidden]>
>>> Subject: Re: [OMPI users] 1.3.1 -rf rankfile behaviour ??
>>> To: Open MPI Users <users_at_[hidden]>
>>> Message-ID:
>>>      <71d2d8cc0904300545v61a42fe1k50086d2704d0f7e6_at_[hidden]>
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>>>
>>> I believe this is fixed now in our development trunk - you can  
>>> download any
>>> tarball starting from last night and give it a try, if you like. Any
>>> feedback would be appreciated.
>>>
>>> Ralph
>>>
>>>
>>> On Apr 14, 2009, at 7:57 AM, Ralph Castain wrote:
>>>
>>> Ah now, I didn't say it -worked-, did I? :-)
>>>
>>> Clearly a bug exists in the program. I'll try to take a look at it  
>>> (if Lenny
>>> doesn't get to it first), but it won't be until later in the week.
>>>
>>> On Apr 14, 2009, at 7:18 AM, Geoffroy Pignot wrote:
>>>
>>> I agree with you Ralph , and that 's what I expect from openmpi  
>>> but my
>>> second example shows that it's not working
>>>
>>> cat hostfile.0
>>> r011n002 slots=4
>>> r011n003 slots=4
>>>
>>> cat rankfile.0
>>>  rank 0=r011n002 slot=0
>>>  rank 1=r011n003 slot=1
>>>
>>> mpirun --hostfile hostfile.0 -rf rankfile.0 -n 1 hostname : -n 1  
>>> hostname
>>> ### CRASHED
>>>
>>> > > Error, invalid rank (1) in the rankfile (rankfile.0)
>>> > >
>>> >  
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> > > [r011n002:25129] [[63976,0],0] ORTE_ERROR_LOG: Bad parameter  
>>> in file
>>> > > rmaps_rank_file.c at line 404
>>> > > [r011n002:25129] [[63976,0],0] ORTE_ERROR_LOG: Bad parameter  
>>> in file
>>> > > base/rmaps_base_map_job.c at line 87
>>> > > [r011n002:25129] [[63976,0],0] ORTE_ERROR_LOG: Bad parameter  
>>> in file
>>> > > base/plm_base_launch_support.c at line 77
>>> > > [r011n002:25129] [[63976,0],0] ORTE_ERROR_LOG: Bad parameter  
>>> in file
>>> > > plm_rsh_module.c at line 985
>>> > >
>>> >  
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> > > A daemon (pid unknown) died unexpectedly on signal 1  while
>>> > attempting to
>>> > > launch so we are aborting.
>>> > >
>>> > > There may be more information reported by the environment (see
>>> > above).
>>> > >
>>> > > This may be because the daemon was unable to find all the needed
>>> > shared
>>> > > libraries on the remote node. You may set your LD_LIBRARY_PATH  
>>> to
>>> > have the
>>> > > location of the shared libraries on the remote nodes and this  
>>> will
>>> > > automatically be forwarded to the remote nodes.
>>> > >
>>> >  
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> > >
>>> >  
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> > > orterun noticed that the job aborted, but has no info as to the
>>> > process
>>> > > that caused that situation.
>>> > >
>>> >  
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> > > orterun: clean termination accomplished
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Message: 4
>>> Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2009 06:55:58 -0600
>>> From: Ralph Castain <rhc_at_[hidden]>
>>> Subject: Re: [OMPI users] 1.3.1 -rf rankfile behaviour ??
>>> To: Open MPI Users <users_at_[hidden]>
>>> Message-ID: <F6290ADA-A196-43F0-A853-CBCB802D8D9C_at_[hidden]>
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed";
>>>     DelSp="yes"
>>>
>>> The rankfile cuts across the entire job - it isn't applied on an
>>> app_context basis. So the ranks in your rankfile must correspond to
>>> the eventual rank of each process in the cmd line.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately, that means you have to count ranks. In your case, you
>>> only have four, so that makes life easier. Your rankfile would look
>>> something like this:
>>>
>>> rank 0=r001n001 slot=0
>>> rank 1=r001n002 slot=1
>>> rank 2=r001n001 slot=1
>>> rank 3=r001n002 slot=2
>>>
>>> HTH
>>> Ralph
>>>
>>> On Apr 14, 2009, at 12:19 AM, Geoffroy Pignot wrote:
>>>
>>> > Hi,
>>> >
>>> > I agree that my examples are not very clear. What I want to do  
>>> is to
>>> > launch a multiexes application (masters-slaves) and benefit from  
>>> the
>>> > processor affinity.
>>> > Could you show me how to convert this command , using -rf option
>>> > (whatever the affinity is)
>>> >
>>> > mpirun -n 1 -host r001n001 master.x options1  : -n 1 -host  
>>> r001n002
>>> > master.x options2 : -n 1 -host r001n001 slave.x options3 : -n 1 -
>>> > host r001n002 slave.x options4
>>> >
>>> > Thanks for your help
>>> >
>>> > Geoffroy
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Message: 2
>>> > Date: Sun, 12 Apr 2009 18:26:35 +0300
>>> > From: Lenny Verkhovsky <lenny.verkhovsky_at_[hidden]>
>>> > Subject: Re: [OMPI users] 1.3.1 -rf rankfile behaviour ??
>>> > To: Open MPI Users <users_at_[hidden]>
>>> > Message-ID:
>>> >        <453d39990904120826t2e1d1d33l7bb1fe3de65b5361_at_[hidden] 
>>> >
>>> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>>> >
>>> > Hi,
>>> >
>>> > The first "crash" is OK, since your rankfile has ranks 0 and 1
>>> > defined,
>>> > while n=1, which means only rank 0 is present and can be  
>>> allocated.
>>> >
>>> > NP must be >= the largest rank in rankfile.
>>> >
>>> > What exactly are you trying to do ?
>>> >
>>> > I tried to recreate your seqv but all I got was
>>> >
>>> > ~/work/svn/ompi/trunk/build_x86-64/install/bin/mpirun --hostfile
>>> > hostfile.0
>>> > -rf rankfile.0 -n 1 hostname : -rf rankfile.1 -n 1 hostname
>>> > [witch19:30798] mca: base: component_find: paffinity
>>> > "mca_paffinity_linux"
>>> > uses an MCA interface that is not recognized (component MCA  
>>> v1.0.0 !=
>>> > supported MCA v2.0.0) -- ignored
>>> >  
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> > It looks like opal_init failed for some reason; your parallel
>>> > process is
>>> > likely to abort. There are many reasons that a parallel process  
>>> can
>>> > fail during opal_init; some of which are due to configuration or
>>> > environment problems. This failure appears to be an internal  
>>> failure;
>>> > here's some additional information (which may only be relevant  
>>> to an
>>> > Open MPI developer):
>>> >
>>> >  opal_carto_base_select failed
>>> >  --> Returned value -13 instead of OPAL_SUCCESS
>>> >  
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> > [witch19:30798] [[INVALID],INVALID] ORTE_ERROR_LOG: Not found in  
>>> file
>>> > ../../orte/runtime/orte_init.c at line 78
>>> > [witch19:30798] [[INVALID],INVALID] ORTE_ERROR_LOG: Not found in  
>>> file
>>> > ../../orte/orted/orted_main.c at line 344
>>> >  
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> > A daemon (pid 11629) died unexpectedly with status 243 while
>>> > attempting
>>> > to launch so we are aborting.
>>> >
>>> > There may be more information reported by the environment (see  
>>> above).
>>> >
>>> > This may be because the daemon was unable to find all the needed
>>> > shared
>>> > libraries on the remote node. You may set your LD_LIBRARY_PATH to
>>> > have the
>>> > location of the shared libraries on the remote nodes and this will
>>> > automatically be forwarded to the remote nodes.
>>> >  
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> >  
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> > mpirun noticed that the job aborted, but has no info as to the  
>>> process
>>> > that caused that situation.
>>> >  
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> > mpirun: clean termination accomplished
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Lenny.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On 4/10/09, Geoffroy Pignot <geopignot_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > Hi ,
>>> > >
>>> > > I am currently testing the process affinity capabilities of
>>> > openmpi and I
>>> > > would like to know if the rankfile behaviour I will describe  
>>> below
>>> > is normal
>>> > > or not ?
>>> > >
>>> > > cat hostfile.0
>>> > > r011n002 slots=4
>>> > > r011n003 slots=4
>>> > >
>>> > > cat rankfile.0
>>> > > rank 0=r011n002 slot=0
>>> > > rank 1=r011n003 slot=1
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> ##################################################################################
>>> > >
>>> > > mpirun --hostfile hostfile.0 -rf rankfile.0 -n 2  hostname ###  
>>> OK
>>> > > r011n002
>>> > > r011n003
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> ##################################################################################
>>> > > but
>>> > > mpirun --hostfile hostfile.0 -rf rankfile.0 -n 1 hostname : -n 1
>>> > hostname
>>> > > ### CRASHED
>>> > > *
>>> > >
>>> >  
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> > > Error, invalid rank (1) in the rankfile (rankfile.0)
>>> > >
>>> >  
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> > > [r011n002:25129] [[63976,0],0] ORTE_ERROR_LOG: Bad parameter  
>>> in file
>>> > > rmaps_rank_file.c at line 404
>>> > > [r011n002:25129] [[63976,0],0] ORTE_ERROR_LOG: Bad parameter  
>>> in file
>>> > > base/rmaps_base_map_job.c at line 87
>>> > > [r011n002:25129] [[63976,0],0] ORTE_ERROR_LOG: Bad parameter  
>>> in file
>>> > > base/plm_base_launch_support.c at line 77
>>> > > [r011n002:25129] [[63976,0],0] ORTE_ERROR_LOG: Bad parameter  
>>> in file
>>> > > plm_rsh_module.c at line 985
>>> > >
>>> >  
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> > > A daemon (pid unknown) died unexpectedly on signal 1  while
>>> > attempting to
>>> > > launch so we are aborting.
>>> > >
>>> > > There may be more information reported by the environment (see
>>> > above).
>>> > >
>>> > > This may be because the daemon was unable to find all the needed
>>> > shared
>>> > > libraries on the remote node. You may set your LD_LIBRARY_PATH  
>>> to
>>> > have the
>>> > > location of the shared libraries on the remote nodes and this  
>>> will
>>> > > automatically be forwarded to the remote nodes.
>>> > >
>>> >  
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> > >
>>> >  
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> > > orterun noticed that the job aborted, but has no info as to the
>>> > process
>>> > > that caused that situation.
>>> > >
>>> >  
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> > > orterun: clean termination accomplished
>>> > > *
>>> > > It seems that the rankfile option is not propagted to the second
>>> > command
>>> > > line ; there is no global understanding of the ranking inside a
>>> > mpirun
>>> > > command.
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> ##################################################################################
>>> > >
>>> > > Assuming that , I tried to provide a rankfile to each command  
>>> line:
>>> > >
>>> > > cat rankfile.0
>>> > > rank 0=r011n002 slot=0
>>> > >
>>> > > cat rankfile.1
>>> > > rank 0=r011n003 slot=1
>>> > >
>>> > > mpirun --hostfile hostfile.0 -rf rankfile.0 -n 1 hostname : -rf
>>> > rankfile.1
>>> > > -n 1 hostname ### CRASHED
>>> > > *[r011n002:28778] *** Process received signal ***
>>> > > [r011n002:28778] Signal: Segmentation fault (11)
>>> > > [r011n002:28778] Signal code: Address not mapped (1)
>>> > > [r011n002:28778] Failing at address: 0x34
>>> > > [r011n002:28778] [ 0] [0xffffe600]
>>> > > [r011n002:28778] [ 1]
>>> > > /tmp/HALMPI/openmpi-1.3.1/lib/libopen-rte.so.
>>> > 0(orte_odls_base_default_get_add_procs_data+0x55d)
>>> > > [0x5557decd]
>>> > > [r011n002:28778] [ 2]
>>> > > /tmp/HALMPI/openmpi-1.3.1/lib/libopen-rte.so.
>>> > 0(orte_plm_base_launch_apps+0x117)
>>> > > [0x555842a7]
>>> > > [r011n002:28778] [ 3] /tmp/HALMPI/openmpi-1.3.1/lib/openmpi/
>>> > mca_plm_rsh.so
>>> > > [0x556098c0]
>>> > > [r011n002:28778] [ 4] /tmp/HALMPI/openmpi-1.3.1/bin/orterun
>>> > [0x804aa27]
>>> > > [r011n002:28778] [ 5] /tmp/HALMPI/openmpi-1.3.1/bin/orterun
>>> > [0x804a022]
>>> > > [r011n002:28778] [ 6] /lib/libc.so.6(__libc_start_main+0xdc)
>>> > [0x9f1dec]
>>> > > [r011n002:28778] [ 7] /tmp/HALMPI/openmpi-1.3.1/bin/orterun
>>> > [0x8049f71]
>>> > > [r011n002:28778] *** End of error message ***
>>> > > Segmentation fault (core dumped)*
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > I hope that I've found a bug because it would be very important
>>> > for me to
>>> > > have this kind of capabiliy .
>>> > > Launch a multiexe mpirun command line and be able to bind my  
>>> exes
>>> > and
>>> > > sockets together.
>>> > >
>>> > > Thanks in advance for your help
>>> > >
>>> > > Geoffroy
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > users mailing list
>>> > users_at_[hidden]
>>> > http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users
>>>
>>> -------------- next part --------------
>>> HTML attachment scrubbed and removed
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> users mailing list
>>> users_at_[hidden]
>>> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users
>>>
>>> End of users Digest, Vol 1202, Issue 2
>>> **************************************
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> users mailing list
>>> users_at_[hidden]
>>> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> users mailing list
>>> users_at_[hidden]
>>> -------------- next part --------------
>>> HTML attachment scrubbed and removed
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> users mailing list
>>> users_at_[hidden]
>>> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users
>>>
>>> End of users Digest, Vol 1218, Issue 2
>>> **************************************
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> users mailing list
>>> users_at_[hidden]
>>> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> users mailing list
>>> users_at_[hidden]
>>> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> users mailing list
>>> users_at_[hidden]
>>> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> users mailing list
>>> users_at_[hidden]
>>> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> users mailing list
>>> users_at_[hidden]
>>> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> users mailing list
>> users_at_[hidden]
>> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users
>
> _______________________________________________
> users mailing list
> users_at_[hidden]
> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users