So, Would it be worthwhile for us to start doing test builds now? Is the code ready for that at this time?
> -----Original Message----- > From: devel [mailto:devel-boun...@lists.open-mpi.org] On Behalf Of > Nathan Hjelm via devel > Sent: Friday, April 12, 2019 11:19 AM > To: Open MPI Developers <devel@lists.open-mpi.org> > Cc: Nathan Hjelm <hje...@me.com>; Castain, Ralph H > <ralph.h.cast...@intel.com>; Yates, Brandon <brandon.ya...@intel.com> > Subject: Re: [OMPI devel] Intel OPA and Open MPI > > That is accurate. We expect to support OPA with the btl/ofi component. It > should give much better performance than osc/pt2pt + mtl/ofi. What would > be good for you to do on your end is verify everything works as expected > and that the performance is on par for what you expect. > > -Nathan > > > On Apr 12, 2019, at 9:11 AM, Heinz, Michael William > <michael.william.he...@intel.com> wrote: > > > > Hey guys, > > > > So, I’ve watched the videos, dug through the release notes, and > participated in a few of the weekly meetings and I’m feeling a little more > comfortable about being a part of Open MPI - and I’m looking forward to it. > > > > But I find myself needing to look for some direction for my participation > over the next few months. > > > > First - a little background. Historically, I’ve been involved with IB/OPA > development for 17+ years now, but for the past decade or so I’ve been > entirely focused on fabric management rather than application-level stuff. > (Heck, if you ever wanted to complain about why OPA management > datagrams are different from IB MADs, feel free to point the finger at me, > I’m happy to explain why the new ones are better… ;-) ) However, it was only > recently that the FM team were given the additional responsibility for > maintaining / participating in our MPI efforts with very little opportunity > for a > transfer of information with the prior team. > > > > So, while I’m looking forward to this new role I’m feeling a bit > overwhelmed - not least of which because I will be unavailable for about 8 > weeks this summer… > > > > In particular, I found an issue in our internal tracking systems that says > > (and > I may have mentioned this before…) > > > > OMPI v5.0.0 will remove osc/pt2pt component that is the only component > that MTLs use (PSM2 and OFI). OMPI v5.0.0 is planned to be released during > summer 2019 (no concrete dates). https://github.com/open- > mpi/ompi/wiki/5.0.x-FeatureList. The implications is that none of the MTLs > used for Omni-Path will support running one sided MPI APIs (RMA). > > > > Is this still accurate? The current feature list says: > > > > If osc/rdma supports all possible scenarios (e.g., all BTLs support the RDMA > methods osc/rdma needs), this should allow us to remove osc/pt2pt (i.e., > 100% migrated to osc/rdma). > > > > If this is accurate, I’m going to need help from the other maintainers to > understand the reason this is being done, the scope of this effort and where > we need to focus our attention. To deal with the lack of coverage over the > summer, I’ve asked a co-worker, Brandon Yates to start sitting in on the > weekly meetings with me. > > > > Again, I’m looking forward to both the opportunity of working with an open > source team, and the chance to focus on the users of our software instead of > just the management of the fabric - I’m just struggling at the moment to get > a handle on this potential deadline. > > > > --- > > Mike Heinz > > Networking Fabric Software Engineer > > Intel Corporation > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@lists.open-mpi.org https://lists.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
