BTW, I was guessing FTB is Fault Tolerant Backbone, but if not, can someone tell me what it is ? If it is not the later, what I just wrote about it makes no sense.
Rich On 12/3/08 9:34 PM, "Richard Graham" <rlgra...@ornl.gov> wrote: > The goal is to use the btl¹s outside of the context of MPI, which was what was > in mind from the day the ompi work started over five years ago, but with no > other use at the time, things grew up intermingled no surprise at all. What > we are attempting to do is to untangle the existing dependencies, and make a > much cleaner distinction between how/what data is passed between layers. > > I expect this will involve some sort of well defined interface between the > btl¹s and orte, and I don¹t know if this will also require something like this > between the btl¹s and the pml I think that interface is rigidly enforced, > but am not sure. > > I expect that explicit calls to FTB in the btl layer would have to be > componentized, especially in the context of what is developing in the FT > working group of the MPI Forum. Not that FTB is bad in any way, just that it > is one of many monitors. > > We will need to talk about this on a case by case basis, and decide how to > proceed. If anyone wants to help, please do. > > Rich > > > On 12/3/08 3:02 PM, "Ralph Castain" <r...@lanl.gov> wrote: > >> I managed to execute the modex-less changes pretty much without >> introducing additional ORTE dependencies into the BTL's, though there >> may be some additions as we look a the other BTLs that I didn't >> address. So hopefully that won't contribute too much to the issue here. >> >> At the moment, I don't think it matters where notifier sits - it might >> be able to move to OPAL. Only catch will be if some notifier component >> requires communications. I'm thinking of FTB, for example, and our own >> local monitoring program that may require TCP messaging. We don't >> currently have anything in OPAL that would support an OPAL level >> messaging system, though perhaps that could be resolved. >> >> We also have dependencies where the BTL's will call orte_ess to find >> out what node another proc is on, the node local rank of that proc, >> etc. Those dependencies are likely to grow after the Dec meeting (see >> wiki for that agenda item), and definitely cannot be moved to OPAL. >> >> However, note that Rich stated the BTL's were -not- moving to OPAL. >> This begs the question: where -are- they going? Into their own layer? >> Will that layer be somewhere in-between OMPI and ORTE (in which case, >> the ORTE dependencies are moot)? >> >> I note that the wiki page doesn't address any of these questions, >> which is understandable if things are just getting underway. But it >> does sound like this is going to take some thought to ensure we don't >> paint ourselves into a corner. >> >> Ralph >> >> >> On Dec 3, 2008, at 12:10 PM, Jeff Squyres wrote: >> >>> > FWIW, I see lots of notifier calls being added to the BTLs (and >>> > elsewhere throughout the OMPI code base) over time... >>> > >>> > On Dec 3, 2008, at 2:07 PM, Tim Mattox wrote: >>> > >>>> >> The BTLs might have added calls to the notifier framework in their >>>> >> error paths. >>>> >> The notifier framework is currently in the ORTE layer... not sure >>>> >> if we could >>>> >> move it down to OPAL. Ralph, any thoughts on that? >>>> >> >>>> >> On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 11:56 AM, Richard Graham <rlgra...@ornl.gov> >>>> >> wrote: >>>>> >>> George told me about what he is doing, so no changes would be >>>>> >>> committed >>>>> >>> until George has his changes in. >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> Are there other changes to the btl's that we should be aware of ? >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> Rich >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> On 12/3/08 11:47 AM, "George Bosilca" <bosi...@eecs.utk.edu> wrote: >>>>> >>> >>>>>> >>>> Terry, >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> >>>> I'm involved [at some degree] in both efforts and I can confirm >>>>>> >>>> these >>>>>> >>>> two efforts will not affect each other in any bad way. >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> >>>> george. >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> >>>> On Dec 3, 2008, at 11:42 , Terry Dontje wrote: >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> I don't have any *strong* objections. However, I know that Eugene >>>>>>> >>>>> and George B have been working on some Fastpath code changes >>>>>>> >>>>> that we >>>>>>> >>>>> should make sure neither project obliterates the other. >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> --td >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> Richard Graham wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>> Now that 1.3 will be released, we would like to go ahead with the >>>>>>>> >>>>>> plan to move the btl¹s out of the MPI layer. Greg Koenig who is >>>>>>>> >>>>>> doing most of the work has started a wiki page with details on >>>>>>>> >>>>>> the >>>>>>>> >>>>>> plans. Right now details are sketchy, as Greg is digging through >>>>>>>> >>>>>> the code, and has only hand written notes on data structures that >>>>>>>> >>>>>> need to be moved, include files that are not needed, etc. The >>>>>>>> >>>>>> page >>>>>>>> >>>>>> is at: >>>>>>>> >>>>>> _https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/ompi/wiki/BTLExtraction_ >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> The first three steps basically only involve code motion, moving >>>>>>>> >>>>>> items such as ompi_list, and renaming them, moving where the code >>>>>>>> >>>>>> is actually located in the repository, and the like. For these we >>>>>>>> >>>>>> do not plan to put out a formal RFC, but comments are very >>>>>>>> >>>>>> welcome, >>>>>>>> >>>>>> and any hands that are willing to help with this are even more >>>>>>>> >>>>>> welcome. >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> The last phase where the btl¹s are made dependent on OPAL, and >>>>>>>> >>>>>> supporting libraries such as mpools I expect will be disruptive, >>>>>>>> >>>>>> and will definitely require an RFC, and will also be a longer >>>>>>>> >>>>>> process. >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> Please send comments, >>>>>>>> >>>>>> Rich >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> >>>>>> devel mailing list >>>>>>>> >>>>>> de...@open-mpi.org >>>>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> >>>>> devel mailing list >>>>>>> >>>>> de...@open-mpi.org >>>>>>> >>>>> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> >>>> devel mailing list >>>>>> >>>> de...@open-mpi.org >>>>>> >>>> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> >>> devel mailing list >>>>> >>> de...@open-mpi.org >>>>> >>> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel >>>>> >>> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> -- >>>> >> Tim Mattox, Ph.D. - http://homepage.mac.com/tmattox/ >>>> >> tmat...@gmail.com || timat...@open-mpi.org >>>> >> I'm a bright... http://www.the-brights.net/ >>>> >> >>>> >> _______________________________________________ >>>> >> devel mailing list >>>> >> de...@open-mpi.org >>>> >> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel >>> > >>> > >>> > -- >>> > Jeff Squyres >>> > Cisco Systems >>> > >>> > >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > devel mailing list >>> > de...@open-mpi.org >>> > http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> devel mailing list >> de...@open-mpi.org >> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel >> > > > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list > de...@open-mpi.org > http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
