Good to know that it does not make any sense. So it not just me. Looking at the call chain I can see
orte_snapc_base_select(ORTE_PROC_IS_HNP, !ORTE_PROC_IS_DAEMON); and the second parameter is used to decide if it is an app or not: int orte_snapc_base_select(bool seed, bool app) in orte/mca/snapc/base/snapc_base_select.c and if it is true the code with the barrier is used. In orte/mca/snapc/base/snapc_base_select.c there is also following comment: /* XXX -- TODO -- framework_subsytem -- this shouldn't be necessary once the framework system is in place */ Is this something which needs to be changed and which might be the cause for this problem? On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 07:27:32AM -0800, Ralph Castain wrote: > That doesn't make any sense - I can't imagine a reason for orte-checkpoint > itself to be running a barrier. I wonder if it is selecting the wrong > component in snapc? > > As for the patch, that isn't going to work. The collective id has to be > *globally* unique, which means that only orterun can issue a new one. So you > have to get thru orte_init before you can request one as it requires a > communication. > > However, like I said, it makes no sense for orte-checkpoint to do a barrier > as it is a singleton - there is nothing for it to "barrier" with. > > On Jan 21, 2014, at 7:24 AM, Adrian Reber <adr...@lisas.de> wrote: > > > I think I still do not really understand how it works. > > > > The barrier on which orte-checkpoint is currently hanging is in > > app_coord_init(). You are also saying that orte-checkpoint > > should not be calling a barrier. The backtrace of the point where it > > is hanging now looks like: > > > > #0 0x00007ffff69befa0 in __nanosleep_nocancel () at > > ../sysdeps/unix/syscall-template.S:81 > > #1 0x00007ffff7b45712 in app_coord_init () at > > ../../../../../orte/mca/snapc/full/snapc_full_app.c:208 > > #2 0x00007ffff7b3a5ce in orte_snapc_full_module_init (seed=false, > > app=true) at ../../../../../orte/mca/snapc/full/snapc_full_module.c:207 > > #3 0x00007ffff7b375de in orte_snapc_base_select (seed=false, app=true) at > > ../../../../orte/mca/snapc/base/snapc_base_select.c:96 > > #4 0x00007ffff7a9884a in orte_ess_base_tool_setup () at > > ../../../../orte/mca/ess/base/ess_base_std_tool.c:192 > > #5 0x00007ffff7a9fe85 in rte_init () at > > ../../../../../orte/mca/ess/tool/ess_tool_module.c:83 > > #6 0x00007ffff7a4647f in orte_init (pargc=0x7fffffffd94c, > > pargv=0x7fffffffd940, flags=8) at ../../orte/runtime/orte_init.c:158 > > #7 0x0000000000402859 in ckpt_init (argc=51, argv=0x7fffffffda78) at > > ../../../../orte/tools/orte-checkpoint/orte-checkpoint.c:610 > > #8 0x0000000000401d7a in main (argc=51, argv=0x7fffffffda78) at > > ../../../../orte/tools/orte-checkpoint/orte-checkpoint.c:245 > > > > Maybe I am doing something completely wrong. I am currently > > running 'orterun -np 2 test-programm'. > > > > In another terminal I am starting orte-checkpoint with the PID of > > orterun and the barrier in app_coord_init() is just before it tries > > to communicate with orterun. Is this the correct setup? > > > > Adrian > > > > On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 05:33:59PM -0600, Josh Hursey wrote: > >> If it is the application, then there is probably a barrier in the > >> app_coord_init() to make sure all the applications are up and running. > >> After this point then the global coordinator knows that the application can > >> be checkpointed. > >> > >> I don't think orte-checkpoint should be calling a barrier - from what I > >> recall. > >> > >> > >> On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 4:46 PM, Ralph Castain <r...@open-mpi.org> wrote: > >> > >>> Is it orte-checkpoint that is hanging, or the app you are trying to > >>> checkpoint? > >>> > >>> > >>> On Jan 20, 2014, at 2:10 PM, Adrian Reber <adr...@lisas.de> wrote: > >>> > >>> Thanks for your help. I tried initializing the barrier correctly (see > >>> attached patch) but now, instead of crashing, it just hangs on the > >>> barrier while running orte-checkpoint > >>> > >>> [dcbz:20150] [[41665,0],0] grpcomm:bad entering barrier > >>> [dcbz:20150] [[41665,0],0] ACTIVATING GRCPCOMM OP 0 at > >>> ../../../../../orte/mca/grpcomm/bad/grpcomm_bad_module.c:206 > >>> > >>> #0 0x00007ffff69befa0 in __nanosleep_nocancel () at > >>> ../sysdeps/unix/syscall-template.S:81 > >>> #1 0x00007ffff7b456ba in app_coord_init () at > >>> ../../../../../orte/mca/snapc/full/snapc_full_app.c:207 > >>> #2 0x00007ffff7b3a582 in orte_snapc_full_module_init (seed=false, > >>> app=true) at ../../../../../orte/mca/snapc/full/snapc_full_module.c:207 > >>> > >>> it hangs looping at ORTE_WAIT_FOR_COMPLETION(coll->active); > >>> > >>> I do not understand on what the barrier here is actually waiting for. > >>> Where > >>> do I need to look to find the place the barrier is waiting for? > >>> > >>> I also tried initializing the collective id's in > >>> orte/mca/plm/base/plm_base_launch_support.c but that code is never > >>> used running the orte-checkpoint tool > >>> > >>> Adrian > >>> > >>> On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 11:46:42AM -0800, Ralph Castain wrote: > >>> > >>> I took a look at this, and I'm afraid you have some work to do in the > >>> orte/mca/snapc code base: > >>> > >>> 1. you must use dynamically allocated buffers for rml.send_buffer_nb. See > >>> r30261 for an example of the changes that need to be made - I did some, > >>> but > >>> can't swear to catching them all. It was enough to at least get a proc > >>> past > >>> the initial snapc registration > >>> > >>> 2. you are reusing collective id's to execute several orte_grpcomm.barrier > >>> calls - those ids are used elsewhere during MPI_Init. This is not allowed > >>> - > >>> a collective id can only be used *once*. What you need to do is go into > >>> orte/mca/plm/base/plm_base_launch_support.c and (when cr is configured) > >>> add > >>> cr-specific collective id's for this purpose. I don't know how many places > >>> in the cr code create their own barriers, but they each need a collective > >>> id. > >>> > >>> If you prefer and have the time, you are welcome to extend the collective > >>> code to allow id reuse. This would require that each daemon and app > >>> "reset" > >>> the collective fields when a collective is declared complete. It isn't > >>> that > >>> hard to do - just never had a reason to do it. I can take a shot at it > >>> when > >>> time permits (may have some time this weekend) > >>> > >>> 3. when you post the non-blocking recv in the snapc/full code, it looks to > >>> me like you need to block until you get the answer. I don't know where in > >>> the code flow this is occurring - if you are not in an event, then it is > >>> okay to block using ORTE_WAIT_FOR_COMPLETION. Look in > >>> orte/mca/routed/base/routed_base_fns.c starting at line 252 for an > >>> example. > >>> > >>> HTH > >>> Ralph > >>> > >>> On Jan 10, 2014, at 12:55 PM, Ralph Castain <r...@open-mpi.org> wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> On Jan 10, 2014, at 12:45 PM, Adrian Reber <adr...@lisas.de> wrote: > >>> > >>> On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 09:48:14AM -0800, Ralph Castain wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> On Jan 10, 2014, at 8:02 AM, Adrian Reber <adr...@lisas.de> wrote: > >>> > >>> I am currently trying to understand how callbacks are working. Right now > >>> I am looking at orte/mca/rml/base/rml_base_receive.c > >>> orte_rml_base_comm_start() which does > >>> > >>> orte_rml.recv_buffer_nb(ORTE_NAME_WILDCARD, > >>> ORTE_RML_TAG_RML_INFO_UPDATE, > >>> ORTE_RML_PERSISTENT, > >>> orte_rml_base_recv, > >>> NULL); > >>> > >>> As far as I understand it orte_rml_base_recv() is the callback function. > >>> At which point should this function run? When the data is actually > >>> received? > >>> > >>> > >>> Not precisely. When data is received by the OOB, it pushes the data into > >>> an event. When that event gets serviced, it calls the > >>> orte_rml_base_receive > >>> function which processes the data to find the matching tag, and then uses > >>> that to execute the callback to the user code. > >>> > >>> > >>> The same for send_buffer_nb() functions. I do not see the callback > >>> functions actually running. How can I verify that the callback functions > >>> are running. Especially for the send case it sounds pretty obvious how > >>> it should work but I never see the callback function running. At least > >>> in my setup. > >>> > >>> > >>> The data is not immediately sent. It gets pushed into an event. When that > >>> event gets serviced, it calls the orte_oob_base_send function which then > >>> passes the data to each active OOB component until one of them says it can > >>> send it. The data is then pushed into another event to get it into the > >>> event base for that component's active module - when that event gets > >>> serviced, the data is sent. Once the data is sent, an event is created > >>> that, when serviced, executes the callback to the user code. > >>> > >>> If you aren't seeing callbacks, the most likely cause is that the orte > >>> progress thread isn't running. Without it, none of this will work. > >>> > >>> > >>> Thanks. Running configure without '--with-ft=cr' I can run a program and > >>> use orte-top. In orterun I can see that the callback is running and > >>> orte-top displays the retrieved information. I can also see in orte-top > >>> that the callbacks are working. > >>> > >>> > >>> Actually, I'm rather impressed - I hadn't tested orte-top and didn't > >>> honestly know if it would work any more! Glad to hear it does :-) > >>> > >>> Doing the same with '--with-ft=cr' > >>> enabled orte-top crashes as well as orte-checkpoint and both (-top and > >>> -checkpoint) seem to no longer have working callbacks and that is why > >>> they are probably crashing. So some code which is enabled by > >>> '--with-ft=cr' > >>> seems to break callbacks in orte-top as well as in orte-checkpoint. > >>> orterun handles callbacks no matter if configured with or without > >>> '--with-ft=cr'. > >>> > >>> > >>> I can take a look this weekend - probably something silly > >>> > >>> > >>> Adrian > >>> > >>> <grpcomm.txt>_______________________________________________ > >>> > >>> 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 > >>> > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Joshua Hursey > >> Assistant Professor of Computer Science > >> University of Wisconsin-La Crosse > >> http://cs.uwlax.edu/~jjhursey > > > >> _______________________________________________ > >> devel mailing list > >> de...@open-mpi.org > >> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel > > > > > > Adrian > > > > -- > > Adrian Reber <adr...@lisas.de> http://lisas.de/~adrian/ > > QOTD: > > "I tried buying a goat instead of a lawn tractor; had to return > > it though. Couldn't figure out a way to connect the snow blower." > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 Adrian -- Adrian Reber <adr...@lisas.de> http://lisas.de/~adrian/ Hempstone's Question: If you have to travel on the Titanic, why not go first class?
