(moving to MPI-3 Collectives list, per Martin and Torsten...) Yes, I have added a reference in the ticket text. One possible reason to keep these separate is that the notion of neighborhood/locale is perhaps harder to specify that file paths and thus might be harder to get into the standard. However, the working group can sort things out in one ticket and bring one or more proposals to the Forum if there is contention over these issues. Best, Jeff On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 9:16 AM, Jim Dinan <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi Jeff,

Please also include ticket #297 in the discussion (merge with your ticket, or otherwise):

https://svn.mpi-forum.org/trac/mpi-forum-web/ticket/297

This ticket proposes MPI_COMM_TYPE_NEIGHBORHOOD, which looks similar to MPI_COMM_TYPE_LOCALE.

~Jim.

On 3/24/13 2:36 PM, Jeff Hammond wrote:

...

Martin encouraged me to socialize this with the Forum. The idea here seems broader than just one working group so I'm sending to the entire Forum for feedback.

See https://svn.mpi-forum.org/trac/mpi-forum-web/ticket/372. The text is included below in case it makes it easier to read on your phone...because I know this is that urgent :-)

Jeff

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: MPI Forum <[email protected]> Date: Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 1:50 PM Subject: [MPI Forum] #372: additional keys for MPI_COMM_SPLIT_TYPE To:

#372: additional keys for MPI_COMM_SPLIT_TYPE

-------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: | Owner: jhammond | Status: new Type: | Milestone: Enhancements to standard | 2013/03/11 Chicago, USA Priority: | Keywords: Forum feedback requested | Author: Bill Gropp: 0 Version: MPI | Author: Adam Moody: 0 <next> | Author: Dick Treumann: 0 Implementation status: | Author: George Bosilca: 0 Waiting | Author: Bronis de Supinski: 0 Author: Rich Graham: 0 | Author: Jeff Squyres: 0 Author: Torsten Hoefler: 0 | Author: Rolf Rabenseifner: 0 Author: Jesper Larsson Traeff: 0 | Author: David Solt: 0 | Author: Rajeev Thakur: 0 | Author: Alexander Supalov: 0 |

-------------------------------------+------------------------------------- {{{MPI_COMM_SPLIT_TYPE}}} currently supports only on key, {{{MPI_COMM_TYPE_SHARED}}}, which refers to shared memory domains, as supported by shared memory windows ({{{MPI_WIN_ALLOCATE_SHARED}}}).

This ticket proposes additional keys that appear useful enough to justify standardization.

The first key address the need for users to have a portable way of querying properties of the filesystem. This key requires the user to specify the specific file path of interest using an MPI_Info object. The communicator returned represents the set of processes that can write to a single instance of that file path. For a local disk, it is likely (but not necessary) that this communicator be the same as returned by {{{MPI_COMM_TYPE_SHARED}}}. On the other hand, globally shared filesystems will return a duplicate of {{{MPI_COMM_WORLD}}}. When the implementation cannot determine the answer, the resulting communicator is {{{MPI_COMM_NULL}}} and users cannot assume any information about the path.

To be perfectly honest, the choice of {{{key = MPI_COMM_TYPE_SHARED}}} to be only used for shared-memory is unfortunately, because we could have instead used this key for anything that could be shared and let the differences be enumerated by {{{MPI_Info}}}. For exampled, shared memory windows could use {{{(key,value)=("memory","shared")}}} (granted, this is a somewhat silly set of options, but it would naturally permit one to use e.g. {{{(key,value)=("filepath","/home")}}} and {{{(key,value)=("device","gpu0")}}}. We could implement the new set of options using the existing key if we standardize {{{MPI_INFO_NULL}}} to mean "shared memory" but that isn't particularly appealing.

In addition to {{{MPI_COMM_TYPE_FILEPATH}}}, which is illustrated below, I think that {{{MPI_COMM_TYPE_DEVICE}}} is useful to standardize as a key without specifying the possible options that the {{{MPI_Info}}} can take, with the exception of noting that, if this key is used with {{{MPI_INFO_NULL}}}, the result is always {{{MPI_COMM_NULL}}}. Devices that implementations could define include coprocessors (aka accelerators or GPUs), NICs (e.g. in the case of multi-rail IB systems) and any number of other machine-specific cases. The purpose of standardizing the key is to encourage implementations to take the most portable route when trying to implement this type of feature, thus confining all of the non-portable aspects to the definition of the {{{(key,value)}}} pair in the info object.

I have also considered {{{MPI_COMM_TYPE_LOCALE}}}, which would also allow the implementation to define info keys to specific, e.g. subcomms sharing an IO node on Cray or Blue Gene, but this could just as easily be implemented using the {{{MPI_COMM_TYPE_DEVICE}}} key. Furthermore, since devices can be specified as a filepath (they often have an associated with a {{{/dev/something}}} on Linux systems), there is no compelling reason to add more than one key. This is, of course, the reason why overloading {{{MPI_COMM_TYPE_SHARED}}} via info objects seems like the most straightforward choice except in regards to backwards compatibility.

What do people think? Can we augment {{{MPI_COMM_TYPE_SHARED}}} with info keys and leave the case of {{{MPI_INFO_NULL}}} to mean shared memory, do we break backwards compatibility or do we add a new key that has the desired catch-all properties?

Here is an example program illustrating the use of the proposed functionality for {{{MPI_COMM_TYPE_FILEPATH}}}: {{{

#include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> #include <string.h> #include <mpi.h>

int main( int argc, char *argv[] ) { int rank; MPI_Info i1, i2, i3, i4, i5; MPI_Comm c0, c1, c2, c3, c4, c5; int result, happy=0;

MPI_Init(&argc,&argv); MPI_Comm_rank(MPI_COMM_WORLD, &rank);

MPI_Info_create( &i1 ); MPI_Info_create( &i2 ); MPI_Info_create( &i3 ); MPI_Info_create( &i4 ); MPI_Info_create( &i5 );

MPI_Info_set( i1, (char*)"path", (char*)"/global-shared-fs" ); MPI_Info_set( i2, (char*)"path", (char*)"/proc-local-fs" ); MPI_Info_set( i3, (char*)"path", (char*)"/node-local-fs" ); MPI_Info_set( i4, (char*)"path", (char*)"/proc-zero-fs" ); MPI_Info_set( i5, (char*)"path", (char*)"/dev/rand" );

MPI_Comm_split_type( MPI_COMM_WORLD, MPI_COMM_TYPE_SHARED, 0, MPI_INFO_NULL, &c0 );

MPI_Comm_split_type( MPI_COMM_WORLD, MPI_COMM_TYPE_FILEPATH, 0, i1, &c1 ); MPI_Comm_split_type( MPI_COMM_WORLD, MPI_COMM_TYPE_FILEPATH, 0, i2, &c2 ); MPI_Comm_split_type( MPI_COMM_WORLD, MPI_COMM_TYPE_FILEPATH, 0, i3, &c3 ); MPI_Comm_split_type( MPI_COMM_WORLD, MPI_COMM_TYPE_FILEPATH, 0, i4, &c4 ); MPI_Comm_split_type( MPI_COMM_WORLD, MPI_COMM_TYPE_FILEPATH, 0, i5, &c5 );

/* a globally visible shared filesystem should result in a comm that is equivalent to world */ MPI_Comm_compare( MPI_COMM_WORLD, c1, &result ); if ( result == MPI_CONGRUENT) happy++;

/* a process-local filesystem should result in MPI_COMM_SELF */ MPI_Comm_compare( MPI_COMM_SELF, c2, &result ); if ( result == MPI_CONGRUENT) happy++;

/* a filesystem shared within the node is likely to result in a communicator equivalent to the one that supports shared memory, provided shared memory is available */ MPI_Comm_compare( c0, c3, &result ); if ( result == MPI_CONGRUENT) happy++;

/* the /proc-zero-fs is only visible from rank 0 of world... */ if (rank==0) { MPI_Comm_compare( MPI_COMM_SELF, c4, &result ); if ( result == MPI_CONGRUENT) happy++; } else { if ( c4 == MPI_COMM_NULL) happy++; }

/* the sharable nature of /dev/rand is probably a meaningless concept so we expect the implementation to return MPI_COMM_NULL for c5 */ if ( c5 == MPI_COMM_NULL) happy++;

MPI_Comm_free( &c1 ); MPI_Comm_free( &c2 ); MPI_Comm_free( &c3 ); MPI_Comm_free( &c4 ); MPI_Comm_free( &c5 );

MPI_Info_free( &i1 ); MPI_Info_free( &i2 ); MPI_Info_free( &i3 ); MPI_Info_free( &i4 ); MPI_Info_free( &i5 );

MPI_Finalize( ); return 0; } }}}

-- Ticket URL: <https://svn.mpi-forum.org/trac/mpi-forum-web/ticket/372> MPI Forum <https://svn.mpi-forum.org/> MPI Forum

_______________________________________________ mpi-forum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum

-- Jeff Hammond Argonne Leadership Computing Facility University of Chicago Computation Institute [email protected] / (630) 252-5381 http://www.linkedin.com/in/jeffhammond https://wiki.alcf.anl.gov/parts/index.php/User:Jhammond