Does this mean that you maintain a separate channel for 'put' and 'gets'
that can use multiple transports and another for atomics?

Josh

On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 10:15 AM, Nathan Hjelm <hje...@lanl.gov> wrote:

>
> In the new osc component I don't try to handle that case. All atomics
> have to be done through the same btl (including atomics on self). I did
> this because with the default setup of Gemini they can not be mixed. If
> it is possible to mix them with other networks I would be happy to add
> an atomic flag for that.
>
> -Nathan
>
> On Wed, Nov 05, 2014 at 03:41:58AM -0500, Joshua Ladd wrote:
> >    Quick question. Out of curiosity, how do you handle the (common) case
> of
> >    mixing network atomics with CPU atomics? Say for a single target with
> two
> >    initiators, one initiator is on host with the target, so goes through
> the
> >    SM BTL, and the other initiator is off host, so goes through the
> network
> >    BTL.
> >
> >    Josh
> >    On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 6:46 PM, Nathan Hjelm <hje...@lanl.gov> wrote:
> >
> >      What: Completely revamp the BTL RDMA interface (btl_put, btl_get) to
> >      better match what is needed for MPI one-sided.
> >
> >      Why: I am preparing to push an enhanced MPI-3 one-sided component
> that
> >      makes use of network rdma and atomic operations to provide a fast
> truely
> >      one-sided implementation. Before I can push this component I want to
> >      change the btl interface to:
> >
> >       - Provide access to network atomic operations. I only need add and
> >         cswap but the interface can be extended to any number of
> operations.
> >
> >         The new interface provides three new functions: btl_atomic_op,
> >         btl_atomic_fop, and btl_atomic_cswap. Additionally there are two
> new
> >         btl_flags to indicate available atomic support:
> >         MCA_BTL_FLAGS_ATOMIC_OPS, and MCA_BTL_FLAGS_ATOMIC_FOPS. The
> >         btl_atomics_flags field has been added to indicate which atomic
> >         operations are supported (see mca_btl_base_atomic_op_t). At this
> time
> >         I only added support for 64-bit integer atomics but I am open to
> >         adding support for 32-bit as well.
> >
> >       - Provide an interface that will allow simultaneous put/get
> operations
> >         without extra calls into the btl. The current interface requires
> the
> >         btl user to call prepare_src/prepare_dst before every rdma
> >         operation. In some cases this is a complete waste (vader, sm with
> >         CMA, knem, or xpmem).
> >
> >         I seperated the registration of memory from the segment info.
> More
> >         information is provided below. The new put/get functions have the
> >         following signatures:
> >
> >      typedef int (*mca_btl_base_module_put_fn_t) (struct
> >      mca_btl_base_module_t *btl,
> >          struct mca_btl_base_endpoint_t *endpoint, void *local_address,
> >          uint64_t remote_address, struct
> mca_btl_base_registration_handle_t
> >      *local_handle,
> >          struct mca_btl_base_registration_handle_t *remote_handle, size_t
> >      size, int flags,
> >          int order, mca_btl_base_rdma_completion_fn_t cbfunc, void
> >      *cbcontext, void *cbdata);
> >
> >      typedef int (*mca_btl_base_module_get_fn_t) (struct
> >      mca_btl_base_module_t *btl,
> >          struct mca_btl_base_endpoint_t *endpoint, void *local_address,
> >          uint64_t remote_address, struct
> mca_btl_base_registration_handle_t
> >      *local_handle,
> >          struct mca_btl_base_registration_handle_t *remote_handle, size_t
> >      size, int flags,
> >          int order, mca_btl_base_rdma_completion_fn_t cbfunc, void
> >      *cbcontext, void *cbdata);
> >
> >      typedef void (*mca_btl_base_rdma_completion_fn_t)(
> >          struct mca_btl_base_module_t* module,
> >          struct mca_btl_base_endpoint_t* endpoint,
> >          void *local_address,
> >          struct mca_btl_base_registration_handle_t *local_handle,
> >          void *context,
> >          void *cbdata,
> >          int status);
> >
> >         I may modify the completion function to provide more information
> on
> >         the completed operation (size).
> >
> >       - Allow the registration of an entire region even if the region
> can not
> >         be modified with a single rdma operation. At this time
> prepare_src
> >         and prepare_dst may modify the size and register a smaller
> >         region. This will not work.
> >
> >         This is done in the new interface through the new
> btl_register_mem,
> >         and btl_deregister_mem interfaces. The btl_register_mem interface
> >         returns a registration handle of size
> btl_registration_handle_size
> >         that can be used as either the local_handle or remote_handle to
> any
> >         rdma/atomic function. BTLs that do not provide these functions
> do not
> >         require registration for rdma/atomic operations.
> >
> >      typedef struct mca_btl_base_registration_handle_t
> >      *(*mca_btl_base_module_register_mem_fn_t)(
> >          struct mca_btl_base_module_t* btl, struct
> mca_btl_base_endpoint_t
> >      *endpoint, void *base,
> >          size_t size, uint32_t flags);
> >
> >      typedef struct mca_btl_base_registration_handle_t
> >      *(*mca_btl_base_module_register_mem_fn_t)(
> >          struct mca_btl_base_module_t* btl, struct
> mca_btl_base_endpoint_t
> >      *endpoint, void *base,
> >          size_t size, uint32_t flags);
> >
> >       - Expose the limitations of the put and get operations so the
> caller
> >         can make decisions before trying a get or put operation. Two
> >         examples: the Gemini interconnect has an alignment restriction on
> >         get, openib devices may have a limit on how large a single
> get/put
> >         operation can be. The current interface sort of gives the put
> limit
> >         but it is tied to the rdma pipeline protocol.
> >
> >         This is done in the new interface by providing btl_get_limit,
> >         btl_get_alignment, btl_put_limit, and btl_put_alignment.
> Operations
> >         that violate these restrictions should return OPAL_ERR_BAD_PARAM
> >         (operation over limit) or OPAL_ERR_NOT_SUPPORTED (operation not
> >         supported due to alignment restructions with either the source or
> >         destination buffer).
> >
> >      This is a big change and I do not expect everyone to like 100% of
> these
> >      changes. I welcome any feedback people have.
> >
> >      When: Tuesday, Nov 17, 2015. This is during SC so there will be
> time for
> >      face-to-face discussion if anyone has any concerns or would like to
> see
> >      something changed.
> >
> >      The proposed new btl interface as well as updated versions of:
> pml/ob1,
> >      btl/openib, btl/self, btl/scif, btl/sm, btl/tcp, btl/ugni, and
> btl/vader
> >      can be found in my btlmod branch at:
> >
> >      https://github.com/hjelmn/ompi/tree/btlmod
> >
> >      Other btls (smcuda, and usnic) still need to be updated to provide
> the
> >      new interface. Unmodified btl will not build.
> >
> >      If there are no objections I will push the btl modifications into
> the
> >      master two weeks from today (Nov 17). Please take a look and let me
> know
> >      what you think.
> >
> >      _______________________________________________
> >      devel mailing list
> >      de...@open-mpi.org
> >      Subscription: http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
> >      Link to this post:
> >      http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/devel/2014/11/16193.php
>
> > _______________________________________________
> > devel mailing list
> > de...@open-mpi.org
> > Subscription: http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
> > Link to this post:
> http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/devel/2014/11/16195.php
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list
> de...@open-mpi.org
> Subscription: http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
> Link to this post:
> http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/devel/2014/11/16198.php
>

Reply via email to