-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 868
WeeklyTelcon_20200714
Geoffrey Paulsen edited this page Jul 14, 2020
·
1 revision
- Dialup Info: (Do not post to public mailing list or public wiki)
- Jeff Squyres (Cisco)
- Artem Polyakov (nVidia/Mellanox)
- Aurelien Bouteiller (UTK)
- Austen Lauria (IBM)
- Barrett, Brian (AWS)
- Brendan Cunningham (Intel)
- Christoph Niethammer (HLRS)
- Edgar Gabriel (UH)
- Geoffrey Paulsen (IBM)
- George Bosilca (UTK)
- Howard Pritchard (LANL)
- Joseph Schuchart
- Josh Hursey (IBM)
- Joshua Ladd (nVidia/Mellanox)
- Matthew Dosanjh (Sandia)
- Noah Evans (Sandia)
- Ralph Castain (Intel)
- Naughton III, Thomas (ORNL)
- Todd Kordenbrock (Sandia)
- Tomislav Janjusic
- William Zhang (AWS)
- Akshay Venkatesh (NVIDIA)
- Brandon Yates (Intel)
- Charles Shereda (LLNL)
- David Bernhold (ORNL)
- Erik Zeiske
- Geoffroy Vallee (ARM)
- Harumi Kuno (HPE)
- Mark Allen (IBM)
- Matias Cabral (Intel)
- Michael Heinz (Intel)
- Nathan Hjelm (Google)
- Scott Breyer (Sandia?)
- Shintaro iwasaki
- William Zhang (AWS)
- Xin Zhao (nVidia/Mellanox)
- mohan (AWS)
- Jeff will send out
- Sessions is now in in.
- Partition communication voted in.
- OpalTSDCreate - takes a thread storage local key that would be tracked locally in opal.
- But when we go to delete, it's not being deleted.
- But want flexibility to destroy on our own or explicitly
- George thinks the mode we have today, since tracking all keys to be released by main thread.
- George thinks Artem's approach is the correct approach.
- Would have to change the way that keys are USED, and different components are using it in a different way.
- Something similar should be done in different places.
- If you do it just for UCX, then others can see how you did it and check for their code.
- So we think current PR is good, but it leaves old API and new API.
- But it might be better to remove OLD way and make broken components do SOMETHING to update their code.
- Should be easy for components to add explicit cleanup calls
- Master branch only.
- Opened a new PUll Request yesterday that addresses the problem as discussed last week.
- Tracking of TLS in common code.
- Have a low level thread specific keys (very simple based on thread implementation)
- Tracked key, probably what you want to use if you want to ensure all TLS is accounted and released at destruction of key.
- Tommy chaged all of the places in OMPI where those keys are used. Just use tracked key instead of regular key.
- Changed set_specific and get_specific to just set and get.
- Please review and give suggestions.
- Does it even make sense to do TLS in OPAL at all?
- May indicate that we have an abstraction wrong somewhere.
- If MPI depends on this in OPAL, then it depends on them in PMIx and other layers?
- Not sure if there is a problem, but at a high level, sounds problematic.
- Baking in pthread assumptions in general is not a good idea.
- That's what this PR does is abstract pthread semantics.
- May be some confusion, no problem with porting this API anywhere.
- Issue raised before is that if you're relying on a certain type of thread in MPI layer.
- But we don't, because there's a framework.
- But Application is linked against PMIx and libevent and to use other threading models is dangerous.
- To make this work, you have to make changes to event polling, etc.
- Not saying we shouldn't take these patches, these make things better.
- But we do have a problem that other thread components just aren't going to "just work", because PMIx and libevent with uses pthreads conflict with other threading models.
- argobots actually uses pthreads, not sure about qthreads.
- Working on a way to configure libevent to make this combo work.
- But we do have a problem that other thread components just aren't going to "just work", because PMIx and libevent with uses pthreads conflict with other threading models.
- Austen will revert.
- Last week:
- George needs some input on PR
- We don't need
_atomic_
in most cases just need volatile - patch linked to the issue PR7914
- We're not breaking things, we just get alot of valid complaints from intel compiler.
- STDOUT of
make
is ~16 MB due to all intel compiler warnings without this fix
- STDOUT of
- There is a PR pending
- Schizo SLURM binding detection - Might not need a solution on v4.0.x
- PRs have gone into v4.0.x and v4.1.x
Blockers All Open Blockers
Review v4.0.x Milestones v4.0.5
- Discussing CUDA init in UCX PML PR 7898
- Looks like a bugfix, so should be okay to put into a release branch.
- Is there a better place to initialize the CUDA hooks?
- If we request a BTL or PML to be loaded, if configured with cuda
- CUDA library is loaded by BTL that requires it.
- Some questions about possibly making it more generic for all PMLs that use CUDA.
- Don't want to load cuda if using only using TCP or Shared Mem
- We'll take this PR once it passes CI and is reviewed.
- v4.0.5 schedule: End of July
- Will create RC1 today after PR7898 goes in.
- Two potential drivers for a quick v4.0.5 turn-around.
- OSC RDMA Bug - May drive a v4.0.5 release.
- Program Aborts on detach.
Review v4.1.x Milestones v4.1.0
-
Schedule: Want to release end-of-July
-
Posted a v4.1.0 rc1 to go through mechanisms to ensure we can release.
-
Release Engineers: Brian (AWS) Jeff Squyres (Cisco)
-
George found an SM BTL issue at Init on master. Jeff filed Issue 7937
- Cacheline size is set very late after modex, everything that uses cacheline before modex.
- Because we align some structs based on that, but
- It would be associated with getting the topology (but not retreived until after the modex)
- Only cuda btl calls the function directly, everyone else extracts from PMIx.
- What we ought to do, no harm in getting topology earlier, just need to ensure PMIx is intialized.
- On v4.1, we don't get the topology before someone requests it much later.
- Must also affect v4.0.x
- George put a fix into master, but making a better change to load it as soon as PMIx is intialized, would be much better.
- Con is that if we're not in a PMIx environment to share this pointer, then every process will go do this discovery, even if they don't need it later.
- Problem is that the process that creates the backing file, creates it very early.
- Someone should review all the branches to Look to see if we got topology before someone uses the cacheline size.
- George saw it in SM BTL structures. Deadlock.
- This isn't tested by our CI infrastructure.
-
Still want:
- George's Collectives
- George is still working on master version of coll
- Next thing he's working on today.
- Tunings for tuned coll
- Nothing to discuss today.
- AVX
- Went in this morning.
- UCX PRs awaiting review.
- George's Collectives
-
Past: We've come to consensus for a v4.1.0 release
- Need include/exclude selection, worried about consistent selection.
- Alot of PRs outstanding, but can't merge until
- Patch for OFI stuff messed up v4.1.x branch.
- Howard has a fix PR, Jeff is looking at.
- Howard changed new OFI BTL parameters to be consistent with MTL
- Not breaking ABI or backwards compatibility.
- v4.1.x branch, branched from v4.0.4 tag.
- NOT touching runtime!!!
- Not going to be pulling in a new PMIx version.
-
All MTT is online on v4.1.x branch
-
Not compiling under SLURM EFA test. (OFI BTL issue)
Review v5.0.0 Milestones v5.0.0
-
No update this week other than master discussion.
-
Need to put OSC pt2pt
- OS RDMA requires a single BTL that can contact every single process.
- This didn't use to be the case. (Comment in the code)
- OS RDMA requires a single BTL that can contact every single process.
-
We can't use the OSC pt2pt.
- It is not thread safe. Doesn't conform to MPI4 standard. Not safe.
- This is just a testing falicy. Could add tests to show this, but still at same boat.
- Either product A or B is broken and we need to fix it.
-
RDMA Onesided should fall back to "my atomics" because TCP will never have rdma atomics.
- The idea was to put the atomics into the BTL base, which could do all of the one-sided atomics under the covers.
-
Jeff will close the PR, and
-
Jeff will Nathan will fetching, get, compare and swap.
-
Two new PRs for MPI4.0 Error handling - new PRs from Aurelien Bouteiller.
-
Does UCX support iWarp?
- Does libFabric support iWarp via verbs provider?
- https://github.com/openucx/ucx/issues/2507 suggest it doesn't.
- Brian thinks that libFabric
- OFI can support iWarp, just need to specify the provider in the include list.
- This person who's asking is a partner not a customer
-
PMIX
- Working on PMIx v4.0.0 which is what Open MPI v5.0 will use.
- Sessions needs something from PMIx v4
- ULFM - not sure if it needs PMIx, think it needs PRRTE changes.
- PPN scaling issue - simple algorithmic issue in this function
- PMIX talked about it. Artem might know someone who might be interested in working on it.
- Algorithm behind one of the interfaces doesn't scale well.
- Not a regression. Above ~ 4K nodes, becomes quadratic.
-
PRRTE
- Nothing's happening there.
- Mostly discussed above.
- Many companies are not allowing a face to face travel until 2021 due to COVID19.
- Instead lets do a series of virtual-face to face?
- Yes this summer to discuss for v5.0
- Maybe we can do it by topic?
- Maybe not 4 or 8 hour things.
- Different topics on different days.
- Do a doodle poll of least-worse days in late July/August.
- August 10th-14th - 3 hour block of time 8-11 Pacific time.
- Jeff will do another doodle for days of the week (vote for 2)
- Start a list of topics.
- George and Jeff will help plan and come to community.
- Done / Submitted.
- May not have Super Computing conference at ALL this year.
- Many other projects are doing a virtual state of the union type meeting to try to cover what they'd usually do in a Birds of a feather meeting.
- Then this works pretty well, and do this a couple of times a year.
- Not constrained to Super Computing
- Almost certain that it will be virtual
- Not sure the cost.
- Ralph and Jeff have been doing ABCs of Open MPI - SO many people. Done 2 of 3 sessions (each went 1.5 hours, lots of questions)
- Slides and Youtube are on website, and will send link to userlist.
- Part 3 is August 5th
- Also want an indept walk through of PMIx initialization / wireup
- scale-testing, PRs have to opt-into it.