Re: [OMPI devel] OMPI devel] RFC: Reenabling the TCP BTL over local interfaces (when specifically requested)

RFC applied via 93fa94f9. On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 7:13 AM, George Bosilca wrote: > It turns out the OMPI behavior today was divergent from what is written in > the README. We already explicitly state that > > - If specified, the "btl_tcp_if_exclude" parameter must

Re: [OMPI devel] OMPI devel] RFC: Reenabling the TCP BTL over local interfaces (when specifically requested)

It turns out the OMPI behavior today was divergent from what is written in the README. We already explicitly state that - If specified, the "btl_tcp_if_exclude" parameter must include the loopback device ("lo" on many Linux platforms), or Open MPI will not be able to route MPI messages

Re: [OMPI devel] OMPI devel] RFC: Reenabling the TCP BTL over local interfaces (when specifically requested)

George, OK then, I recommend we explicitly state in the README that loopback interface can no more be omitted from btl_tcp_if_exclude when running on multiple nodes Cheers, Gilles On Thursday, September 22, 2016, George Bosilca wrote: > Thanks for clarifying, I now

Re: [OMPI devel] OMPI devel] RFC: Reenabling the TCP BTL over local interfaces (when specifically requested)

Thanks for clarifying, I now understand what your objection/suggestion was. We all misconfigured OMPI at least once, but that allowed us to learn how to do it right. Instead of adding extra protections for corner-cases, maybe we should fix our exclusivity flag so that the scenario you describe

Re: [OMPI devel] OMPI devel] RFC: Reenabling the TCP BTL over local interfaces (when specifically requested)

ok, i was not clear by "let's consider the case where "lo" is *not* excluded via the btl_tcp_if_exclude MCA param" i really meant "let's consider the case where the value of the btl_tcp_if_exclude MCA param has been forced to a list of network/interfaces that do not contain any reference (e.g.

Re: [OMPI devel] OMPI devel] RFC: Reenabling the TCP BTL over local interfaces (when specifically requested)

On Wednesday, September 21, 2016, Gilles Gouaillardet < gilles.gouaillar...@gmail.com> wrote: > George, > > let's consider the case where "lo" is *not* excluded via the > btl_tcp_if_exclude MCA param > (if i understand correctly, the following is also true if "lo" is > included via the

Re: [OMPI devel] OMPI devel] RFC: Reenabling the TCP BTL over local interfaces (when specifically requested)

George, let's consider the case where "lo" is *not* excluded via the btl_tcp_if_exclude MCA param (if i understand correctly, the following is also true if "lo" is included via the btl_tcp_if_include MCA param) currently, and because of/thanks to the test that is done "deep inside" 1) on a

Re: [OMPI devel] OMPI devel] RFC: Reenabling the TCP BTL over local interfaces (when specifically requested)

Gilles, I don't understand how your proposal is any different than what we have today. I quote "If [locality flag is set], then we could keep a hard coded test so 127.x.y.z address (and IPv6 equivalent) are never used (even if included or not excluded) for inter node communication". We already

Re: [OMPI devel] OMPI devel] RFC: Reenabling the TCP BTL over local interfaces (when specifically requested)

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Gilles Gouaillardet < gilles.gouaillar...@gmail.com> wrote: > > if i want to exclude ib0, i might want to > mpirun --mca btl_tcp_if_exclude ib0 ... > > to me, this is an honest mistake, but with your proposal, i would be > screwed when > running on more than one

Re: [OMPI devel] OMPI devel] RFC: Reenabling the TCP BTL over local interfaces (when specifically requested)

George, i got that, and i consider my suggestion as an improvement to your proposal. if i want to exclude ib0, i might want to mpirun --mca btl_tcp_if_exclude ib0 ... to me, this is an honest mistake, but with your proposal, i would be screwed when running on more than one node because i should

Re: [OMPI devel] OMPI devel] RFC: Reenabling the TCP BTL over local interfaces (when specifically requested)

My proposal is not about adding new ways of deciding what is local and what not. I proposed to use the corresponding MCA parameters to allow the user to decide. More specifically, I want to be able to change the exclude and include MCA to enable TCP over local addresses. George On Sep 21, 2016

Re: [OMPI devel] OMPI devel] RFC: Reenabling the TCP BTL over local interfaces (when specifically requested)

FWIW: you know the location of every proc (to at least the host level) from time of orte_init, which should precede anything in the BTL > On Sep 21, 2016, at 8:31 AM, Gilles Gouaillardet > wrote: > > George, > > Is proc locality already set at that time ? > >

Re: [OMPI devel] OMPI devel] RFC: Reenabling the TCP BTL over local interfaces (when specifically requested)

George, Is proc locality already set at that time ? If yes, then we could keep a hard coded test so 127.x.y.z address (and IPv6 equivalent) are never used (even if included or not excluded) for inter node communication Cheers, Gilles "Jeff Squyres (jsquyres)" wrote: >On