We already have conditional compilation there at configure time (see ompi/mca/btl/sctp/configure.m4) so it won't built unless requested. Likewise, you can use the MCA params to select to use it or not (-mca btl sctp,sm,self).
I'm not aware of any sctp-specific tests. However, there are lots of simple MPI tests you could run that would test it as a BTL - anything that would exchange data across nodes, for example. Nobody has spoken up to "own" the sctp btl at this time, so I think you'd have a pretty free hand with it (subject to our usual critique to ensure consistency across the BTLs). On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 4:31 PM, Prindeville, Philip < philip.prindevi...@hp.com> wrote: > I think I understand. > > > > I’ll pull a copy of trunk and dig around in there. > > > > Is there a reason that the code can’t be gated by conditional compilation > flags or detect the environment at run-time? > > > > Is there anything in the way of a set of verification tests? And what’s > the provenance of the SCTP code that’s in trunk? > > > > Thanks, > > > > -Philip > > > > > > *From:* devel [mailto:devel-boun...@open-mpi.org] *On Behalf Of *Ralph > Castain > *Sent:* Thursday, December 12, 2013 8:41 AM > *To:* Open MPI Developers > > *Subject:* Re: [OMPI devel] iWARP development > > > > Be aware that we removed SCTP from the 1.7 release series because of its > unknown state of repair - I don't believe anyone has tested it in quite > some time, and nobody has been maintaining it so far as we know. Not saying > it won't work - just saying that I don't think we know :-/ > > > > On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 6:07 PM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) < > jsquy...@cisco.com> wrote: > > On Dec 11, 2013, at 5:33 PM, "Prindeville, Philip" < > philip.prindevi...@hp.com> wrote: > > > I was wondering what the current state of iWARP development is. > > Open MPI's iWARP support is part of the "openib" BTL (so named because > OpenFabrics used to be known as OpenIB, before iWARP joined, and we never > changed the name of our plugin after OFA became OFA). > > > > There are some features we’re interested in, and from what I can tell > the iWARP RFCs/Internet Drafts haven’t caught up to related developments. > > As George mentioned, we deleted the SCTP plugin from the 1.7 release > branch -- but that's a standalone SCTP plugin, which is not what I think > you're asking about it. > > > > Part of our interest is in using SCTP as the LLP for iWARP, and updating > that adaptation to the latest SCTP work. > > Gotcha. > > > > For instance: > > > > RFC 6458 – SCTP authentication > > RFC 6458 – SCTP out-of-order delivery > > RFC 6458 – SCTP association end-point address changes > > RFC 6458 – SCTP Receive Information > > RFC 6458 – SCTP partially reliable delivery > > RFC 6458 – SCTP key management > > RFC 5061 – SCTP Dynamic address reconfiguration (useful for hot NIC > swaps in a high availability environment) > > > > We’d also like to see load-sharing in multipath environments, and > sender-side traffic shaping support. > > Sounds nifty. > > > > From what I can tell, the iWARP SCTP work that’s been done predates > RFC-6458, and hence I’m assuming it’s aligned to RFC-5043. > > Sure...? > > > > Other questions I have: > > > > Has this code been tested extensively on non-x86 platforms? What about > IA64, PPC64, ARM7, or MIPS 7K? > > Doubtful. The openib BTL is known to work with IB and iWARP on a variety > of x86 platforms. I have no idea, and would kinda doubt, if it has been > tested on any of the other platforms you've specified. > > > > Is anyone doing any code to port SolarFlare OpenOnload stack to support > Open MPI’s iWARP? > > Nope. SF has told me/others that they're happy just doing their onload > TCP through OMPI -- they don't see the need to do their own OO plugin (but > don't take my word for it; I certainly cannot speak for them -- feel free > to ask them yourself). > > > > And a minor note… Just looking at the 1.7.3 tarball and grepping for > SCTP in it, I find only a few matches, such as this: > > > > evutil_getaddrinfo_infer_protocols(struct evutil_addrinfo *hints) > > { > > … > > #ifdef IPPROTO_SCTP > > else if (hints->ai_protocol == > IPPROTO_SCTP) > > hints->ai_socktype = > SOCK_STREAM; > > #endif > > } > > } > > > > And this has me puzzled: SCTP is predominately a SOCK_SEQPACKET, isn’t > it? (The whole point of using it and not TCP as a transport is it preserves > record boundaries, supports out-of-order delivery and message interleaving, > etc.) > > > > At least, that’s how it registers itself as a protocol in Linux 3.12 in > net/sctp/protocol.c … > > > > Apologies if there’s a better mailing list for iWARP specific questions. > I’m looking at a lot of this stuff for the first time and having to ramp up > quickly. > > > > Thanks, > > > > -Philip > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > devel mailing list > > de...@open-mpi.org > > http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel > > -- > Jeff Squyres > jsquy...@cisco.com > For corporate legal information go to: > http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/ > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 >
