I already suggested the configure option, but it doesn’t solve the problem. I 
wouldn’t be terribly surprised to find that Cray also has an undetected problem 
given the nature of the issue - just a question of the amount of testing, 
variety of environments, etc.

Nobody has to wait for the next major release, though that isn’t so far off 
anyway - there has never been an issue with bringing in a new component during 
a release series.

Let’s just fix this the right way and bring it into 4.1 or 4.2. We may want to 
look at fixing the osc/rdma/ofi bandaid as well while we are at it.

Ralph


> On Sep 20, 2018, at 4:45 PM, Patinyasakdikul, Thananon 
> <tpati...@vols.utk.edu> wrote:
> 
> I understand and agree with your point. My initial email is just out of 
> curiosity.
> 
> Howard tested this BTL for Cray in the summer as well. So this seems to only 
> affected OPA hardware.
> 
> I just remember that in the summer, I have to make some change in libpsm2 to 
> get this BTL to work for OPA.  Maybe this is the problem as the default 
> libpsm2 won't work.
> 
> So maybe we can fix this in configure step to detect version of libpsm2 and 
> dont build if we are not satisfied.
> 
> Another idea is maybe we dont build this BTL by default. So the user with 
> Cray hardware can still use it if they want. (Just rebuild with the btl)  - 
> We just need to verify if it still works on Cray.  This way, OFI stakeholders 
> does not have to wait until next major release to get this in.
> 
> 
> Arm
> 
> 
> On Thu, Sep 20, 2018, 7:18 PM Ralph H Castain <r...@open-mpi.org 
> <mailto:r...@open-mpi.org>> wrote:
> I suspect it is a question of what you tested and in which scenarios. Problem 
> is that it can bite someone and there isn’t a clean/obvious solution that 
> doesn’t require the user to do something - e.g., like having to know that 
> they need to disable a BTL. Matias has proposed an mca-based approach, but I 
> would much rather we just fix this correctly. Bandaids have a habit of 
> becoming permanently forgotten - until someone pulls on it and things unravel.
> 
> 
>> On Sep 20, 2018, at 4:14 PM, Patinyasakdikul, Thananon 
>> <tpati...@vols.utk.edu <mailto:tpati...@vols.utk.edu>> wrote:
>> 
>> In the summer, I tested this BTL with along with the MTL and able to use 
>> both of them interchangeably with no problem. I dont know what changed. 
>> libpsm2?
>> 
>> 
>> Arm
>> 
>> 
>> On Thu, Sep 20, 2018, 7:06 PM Ralph H Castain <r...@open-mpi.org 
>> <mailto:r...@open-mpi.org>> wrote:
>> We have too many discussion threads overlapping on the same email chain - so 
>> let’s break the discussion on the OFI problem into its own chain.
>> 
>> We have been investigating this locally and found there are a number of 
>> conflicts between the MTLs and the OFI/BTL stepping on each other. The 
>> correct solution is to move endpoint creation/reporting into a the 
>> opal/mca/common area, but that is going to take some work and will likely 
>> impact release schedules.
>> 
>> Accordingly, we propose to remove the OFI/BTL component from v4.0.0, fix the 
>> problem in master, and then consider bringing it back as a package to v4.1 
>> or v4.2.
>> 
>> Comments? If we agree, I’ll file a PR to remove it.
>> Ralph
>> 
>> 
>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>> 
>>> From: Peter Kjellström <c...@nsc.liu.se <mailto:c...@nsc.liu.se>>
>>> Subject: Re: [OMPI devel] Announcing Open MPI v4.0.0rc1
>>> Date: September 20, 2018 at 5:18:35 AM PDT
>>> To: "Gabriel, Edgar" <egabr...@central.uh.edu 
>>> <mailto:egabr...@central.uh.edu>>
>>> Cc: Open MPI Developers <devel@lists.open-mpi.org 
>>> <mailto:devel@lists.open-mpi.org>>
>>> Reply-To: Open MPI Developers <devel@lists.open-mpi.org 
>>> <mailto:devel@lists.open-mpi.org>>
>>> 
>>> On Wed, 19 Sep 2018 16:24:53 +0000
>>> "Gabriel, Edgar" <egabr...@central.uh.edu <mailto:egabr...@central.uh.edu>> 
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> I performed some tests on our Omnipath cluster, and I have a mixed
>>>> bag of results with 4.0.0rc1
>>> 
>>> I've also tried it on our OPA cluster (skylake+centos-7+inbox) with
>>> very similar results.
>>> 
>>>> compute-1-1.local.4351PSM2 has not been initialized
>>>> compute-1-0.local.3826PSM2 has not been initialized
>>> 
>>> yup I too see these.
>>> 
>>>> mpirun detected that one or more processes exited with non-zero
>>>> status, thus causing the job to be terminated. The first process to
>>>> do so was:
>>>> 
>>>>              Process name: [[38418,1],1]
>>>>              Exit code:    255
>>>>              
>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> 
>>> yup.
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 2.       The ofi mtl does not work at all on our Omnipath cluster. If
>>>> I try to force it using ‘mpirun –mca mtl ofi …’ I get the following
>>>> error message.
>>> 
>>> Yes ofi seems broken. But not even disabling it helps me completely (I
>>> see "mca_btl_ofi.so           [.] mca_btl_ofi_component_progress" in my
>>> perf top...
>>> 
>>>> 3.       The openib btl component is always getting in the way with
>>>> annoying warnings. It is not really used, but constantly complains:
>>> ...
>>>> [sabine.cacds.uh.edu:25996 <http://sabine.cacds.uh.edu:25996/>] 1 more 
>>>> process has sent help message
>>>> help-mpi-btl-openib.txt / ib port not selected
>>> 
>>> Yup.
>>> 
>>> ...
>>>> So bottom line, if I do
>>>> 
>>>> mpirun –mca btl^openib –mca mtl^ofi ….
>>>> 
>>>> my tests finish correctly, although mpirun will still return an error.
>>> 
>>> I get some things to work with this approach (two ranks on two nodes
>>> for example). But a lot of things crash rahter hard:
>>> 
>>> $ mpirun -mca btl ^openib -mca mtl
>>> ^ofi ./openmpi-4.0.0rc1/imb.openmpi-4.0.0rc1
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> PSM2 was unable to open an endpoint. Please make sure that the network
>>> link is active on the node and the hardware is functioning.
>>> 
>>>  Error: Failure in initializing endpoint
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> n909.279895hfi_userinit: assign_context command failed: Device or
>>> resource busy n909.279895psmi_context_open: hfi_userinit: failed,
>>> trying again (1/3)
>>> ...
>>>  PML add procs failed
>>>  --> Returned "Error" (-1) instead of "Success" (0)
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> [n908:298761] *** An error occurred in MPI_Init
>>> [n908:298761] *** reported by process [4092002305,59]
>>> [n908:298761] *** on a NULL communicator
>>> [n908:298761] *** Unknown error
>>> [n908:298761] *** MPI_ERRORS_ARE_FATAL (processes in this communicator
>>>  will now abort, [n908:298761] ***    and potentially your MPI job)
>>> [n907:407748] 255 more processes have sent help message
>>>  help-mtl-psm2.txt / unable to open endpoint [n907:407748] Set MCA
>>>  parameter "orte_base_help_aggregate" to 0 to see all help / error
>>>  messages [n907:407748] 127 more processes have sent help message
>>>  help-mpi-runtime.txt / mpi_init:startup:internal-failure
>>>  [n907:407748] 56 more processes have sent help message
>>>  help-mpi-errors.txt / mpi_errors_are_fatal unknown handle
>>> 
>>> If I disable psm2 too I get it to run (apparantly on vader?)
>>> 
>>> /Peter K
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> devel mailing list
>>> devel@lists.open-mpi.org <mailto:devel@lists.open-mpi.org>
>>> https://lists.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo/devel 
>>> <https://lists.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo/devel>
>> _______________________________________________
>> devel mailing list
>> devel@lists.open-mpi.org <mailto:devel@lists.open-mpi.org>
>> https://lists.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo/devel 
>> <https://lists.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo/devel>_______________________________________________
>> devel mailing list
>> devel@lists.open-mpi.org <mailto:devel@lists.open-mpi.org>
>> https://lists.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo/devel 
>> <https://lists.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo/devel>
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list
> devel@lists.open-mpi.org <mailto:devel@lists.open-mpi.org>
> https://lists.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo/devel 
> <https://lists.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo/devel>_______________________________________________
> devel mailing list
> devel@lists.open-mpi.org
> https://lists.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@lists.open-mpi.org
https://lists.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Reply via email to