January 2017 - mpiwg-tools - mailman3.cels.anl.gov

Meeting reminder: Debuggers 1/26/17
by Mohror, Kathryn 25 Jan '17

25 Jan '17

Hi all, This is a reminder of our regularly scheduled Tools WG meeting tomorrow 1/26 at 8:00 AM PST, 11 AM EST, 5 PM MEZ. Meeting connection information is here: https://github.com/mpiwg-tools/tools-issues/wiki/Meetings Let's continue our discussion from last time. I think a good follow on topic will be how to define info keys for the interface such that they are general enough to be portable across resource managers yet informative enough to be useful. Talk with you tomorrow! Kathryn _________________________________________________________________ Kathryn Mohror, kathryn(a)llnl.gov<mailto:[email protected]>, http://scalability.llnl.gov/ Scalability Team @ Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA, USA

1 0

Re: [mpiwg-tools] Tools topics meeting reminder: Jan 19, 2017
by Schulz, Martin 22 Jan '17

22 Jan '17

Hi Jeff, Don’t get me wrong - I wasn’t proposing to push this onto the long bench and do it after MPI-4. There is no reason to not bring this up in time for MPI 4 or even develop it together. I was just suggesting to decouple this from the actual events ticket for two reason: - I think the events part is fairly far along and probably easily accepted and I was suggesting to not push it out because of this - We need a clean retrofit solution anyway to make it work for variables - we can the use it for events as well. At the end, this is up to Marc-Andre since he is doing the work :) Martin > On Jan 20, 2017, at 6:41 PM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) <jsquyres(a)cisco.com> wrote: > > My $0.02: we know that there are limitations with the way we've been approaching this stuff for years (over specifying, e.g. PERUSE, which got shot down/shunned, and under specifying leads to tools without any semantic information and implementations that are not incentivized to do anything because the Forum doesn't like "creative" uses of the API, even if they give semantic information to the tools [who are asking exactly for this semantic information] -- e.g., usNIC BTL use of MPI_T variables on a per-interface basis). > > Why not learn from these limitations and propose something better? > > My point: if we're going to do this, do it right. Let's not have more buyer's remorse after MPI-4 because the new API (still) doesn't give tools any rich and/or semantic information. > > ---- > > Keep in mind that I proposed two different ideas: > > 1. The idea of identifying event sources by a (vendor ID, part ID, source ID) tuple > 2. The idea of a sanctioned extension mechanism > > Note that neither of these are new ideas; they're borrowed from best practices that just happen to be (just barely) outside of the realm of MPI. > > They're still best practices, though. > > >> On Jan 20, 2017, at 12:03 AM, Martin Schulz <schulzm(a)llnl.gov> wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> >> I was thinking about today’s discussion on the tools call and since I won’t be able to join in two weeks, I thought I’d send a follow-up to start a discussion: >> >> I like Jeff’s ideas to provide cross-platform events that are keyed using a vendor ID (or sets of IDs). As Jeff mentioned, it would be cool to see common events in different MPIs if they are built on the same underlying layer. >> >> Listing to the discussion today, though, I think this would face quite some controversy in the forum and makes the overall problem quite a bit bigger. Also, this functionality seems useful for control and performance variables, for the same reason, and hence it would be good to look for a solution that can also be retrofitted to these variables. A second set of get info calls that translate an MPI specific event/variable ID to a vendor ID could be one option (but just shooting off the hip right now). >> >> I’d therefore suggest to separate the two issues - one ticket to add events in the style that we have already (which seems to be quite acceptable to the forum, at least there weren’t many negative comments) - and then a second ticket on adding vendor IDs to all three MPI_T concepts (again in the same style). This could help MPI_T events in its discussion in the forum and potentially get it passed sooner and it would give us consistency between the three MPI_T concepts. >> >> What do you all think about this? >> >> Thanks! >> >> Martin >> >> >>> On Jan 19, 2017, at 1:15 AM, Marc-Andre Hermanns <hermanns(a)jara.rwth-aachen.de> wrote: >>> >>> Dear all, >>> >>> This is the gentle reminder for this week's call with a session on >>> *Performance Tools*: >>> >>> Thursday Jan 19, 2017 11 a.m. Eastern Time (*today*) >>> >>> Here is the webex link: >>> >>> https://cisco.webex.com/ciscosales/j.php?MTID=m0fb3e4a68162bff5874849e4700b… >>> >>> Agenda: >>> - MPI_T events >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Marc-Andre >>> -- >>> Marc-Andre Hermanns >>> Jülich Aachen Research Alliance, >>> High Performance Computing (JARA-HPC) >>> Jülich Supercomputing Centre (JSC) >>> >>> Wilhelm-Johnen-Str. >>> 52425 Jülich >>> Germany >>> >>> Phone: +49 2461 61 2509 | +49 241 80 24381 >>> Fax: +49 2461 80 6 99753 >>> www.jara.org/jara-hpc >>> email: hermanns(a)jara.rwth-aachen.de >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> mpiwg-tools mailing list >>> mpiwg-tools(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >>> https://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo/mpiwg-tools >> >> ________________________________________________________________________ >> Martin Schulz, schulzm(a)llnl.gov, http://scalability.llnl.gov/ >> CASC @ Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, USA >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> mpiwg-tools mailing list >> mpiwg-tools(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >> https://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo/mpiwg-tools > > > -- > Jeff Squyres > jsquyres(a)cisco.com > > _______________________________________________ > mpiwg-tools mailing list > mpiwg-tools(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > https://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo/mpiwg-tools

1 0

Re: [mpiwg-tools] Tools topics meeting reminder: Jan 19, 2017
by Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) 20 Jan '17

20 Jan '17

My $0.02: we know that there are limitations with the way we've been approaching this stuff for years (over specifying, e.g. PERUSE, which got shot down/shunned, and under specifying leads to tools without any semantic information and implementations that are not incentivized to do anything because the Forum doesn't like "creative" uses of the API, even if they give semantic information to the tools [who are asking exactly for this semantic information] -- e.g., usNIC BTL use of MPI_T variables on a per-interface basis). Why not learn from these limitations and propose something better? My point: if we're going to do this, do it right. Let's not have more buyer's remorse after MPI-4 because the new API (still) doesn't give tools any rich and/or semantic information. ---- Keep in mind that I proposed two different ideas: 1. The idea of identifying event sources by a (vendor ID, part ID, source ID) tuple 2. The idea of a sanctioned extension mechanism Note that neither of these are new ideas; they're borrowed from best practices that just happen to be (just barely) outside of the realm of MPI. They're still best practices, though. > On Jan 20, 2017, at 12:03 AM, Martin Schulz <schulzm(a)llnl.gov> wrote: > > Hi all, > > I was thinking about today’s discussion on the tools call and since I won’t be able to join in two weeks, I thought I’d send a follow-up to start a discussion: > > I like Jeff’s ideas to provide cross-platform events that are keyed using a vendor ID (or sets of IDs). As Jeff mentioned, it would be cool to see common events in different MPIs if they are built on the same underlying layer. > > Listing to the discussion today, though, I think this would face quite some controversy in the forum and makes the overall problem quite a bit bigger. Also, this functionality seems useful for control and performance variables, for the same reason, and hence it would be good to look for a solution that can also be retrofitted to these variables. A second set of get info calls that translate an MPI specific event/variable ID to a vendor ID could be one option (but just shooting off the hip right now). > > I’d therefore suggest to separate the two issues - one ticket to add events in the style that we have already (which seems to be quite acceptable to the forum, at least there weren’t many negative comments) - and then a second ticket on adding vendor IDs to all three MPI_T concepts (again in the same style). This could help MPI_T events in its discussion in the forum and potentially get it passed sooner and it would give us consistency between the three MPI_T concepts. > > What do you all think about this? > > Thanks! > > Martin > > >> On Jan 19, 2017, at 1:15 AM, Marc-Andre Hermanns <hermanns(a)jara.rwth-aachen.de> wrote: >> >> Dear all, >> >> This is the gentle reminder for this week's call with a session on >> *Performance Tools*: >> >> Thursday Jan 19, 2017 11 a.m. Eastern Time (*today*) >> >> Here is the webex link: >> >> https://cisco.webex.com/ciscosales/j.php?MTID=m0fb3e4a68162bff5874849e4700b… >> >> Agenda: >> - MPI_T events >> >> Cheers, >> Marc-Andre >> -- >> Marc-Andre Hermanns >> Jülich Aachen Research Alliance, >> High Performance Computing (JARA-HPC) >> Jülich Supercomputing Centre (JSC) >> >> Wilhelm-Johnen-Str. >> 52425 Jülich >> Germany >> >> Phone: +49 2461 61 2509 | +49 241 80 24381 >> Fax: +49 2461 80 6 99753 >> www.jara.org/jara-hpc >> email: hermanns(a)jara.rwth-aachen.de >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> mpiwg-tools mailing list >> mpiwg-tools(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >> https://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo/mpiwg-tools > > ________________________________________________________________________ > Martin Schulz, schulzm(a)llnl.gov, http://scalability.llnl.gov/ > CASC @ Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, USA > > > > _______________________________________________ > mpiwg-tools mailing list > mpiwg-tools(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > https://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo/mpiwg-tools -- Jeff Squyres jsquyres(a)cisco.com

1 0

Re: [mpiwg-tools] Tools topics meeting reminder: Jan 19, 2017
by Martin Schulz 19 Jan '17

19 Jan '17

Hi all, I was thinking about today’s discussion on the tools call and since I won’t be able to join in two weeks, I thought I’d send a follow-up to start a discussion: I like Jeff’s ideas to provide cross-platform events that are keyed using a vendor ID (or sets of IDs). As Jeff mentioned, it would be cool to see common events in different MPIs if they are built on the same underlying layer. Listing to the discussion today, though, I think this would face quite some controversy in the forum and makes the overall problem quite a bit bigger. Also, this functionality seems useful for control and performance variables, for the same reason, and hence it would be good to look for a solution that can also be retrofitted to these variables. A second set of get info calls that translate an MPI specific event/variable ID to a vendor ID could be one option (but just shooting off the hip right now). I’d therefore suggest to separate the two issues - one ticket to add events in the style that we have already (which seems to be quite acceptable to the forum, at least there weren’t many negative comments) - and then a second ticket on adding vendor IDs to all three MPI_T concepts (again in the same style). This could help MPI_T events in its discussion in the forum and potentially get it passed sooner and it would give us consistency between the three MPI_T concepts. What do you all think about this? Thanks! Martin > On Jan 19, 2017, at 1:15 AM, Marc-Andre Hermanns <hermanns(a)jara.rwth-aachen.de> wrote: > > Dear all, > > This is the gentle reminder for this week's call with a session on > *Performance Tools*: > > Thursday Jan 19, 2017 11 a.m. Eastern Time (*today*) > > Here is the webex link: > > https://cisco.webex.com/ciscosales/j.php?MTID=m0fb3e4a68162bff5874849e4700b… > > Agenda: > - MPI_T events > > Cheers, > Marc-Andre > -- > Marc-Andre Hermanns > Jülich Aachen Research Alliance, > High Performance Computing (JARA-HPC) > Jülich Supercomputing Centre (JSC) > > Wilhelm-Johnen-Str. > 52425 Jülich > Germany > > Phone: +49 2461 61 2509 | +49 241 80 24381 > Fax: +49 2461 80 6 99753 > www.jara.org/jara-hpc > email: hermanns(a)jara.rwth-aachen.de > > > _______________________________________________ > mpiwg-tools mailing list > mpiwg-tools(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > https://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo/mpiwg-tools ________________________________________________________________________ Martin Schulz, schulzm(a)llnl.gov, http://scalability.llnl.gov/ CASC @ Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, USA

1 0

Tools topics meeting reminder: Jan 19, 2017
by Marc-Andre Hermanns 19 Jan '17

19 Jan '17

Dear all, This is the gentle reminder for this week's call with a session on *Performance Tools*: Thursday Jan 19, 2017 11 a.m. Eastern Time (*today*) Here is the webex link: https://cisco.webex.com/ciscosales/j.php?MTID=m0fb3e4a68162bff5874849e4700b… Agenda: - MPI_T events Cheers, Marc-Andre -- Marc-Andre Hermanns Jülich Aachen Research Alliance, High Performance Computing (JARA-HPC) Jülich Supercomputing Centre (JSC) Wilhelm-Johnen-Str. 52425 Jülich Germany Phone: +49 2461 61 2509 | +49 241 80 24381 Fax: +49 2461 80 6 99753 www.jara.org/jara-hpc email: hermanns(a)jara.rwth-aachen.de

1 0

Re: [mpiwg-tools] Meeting reminder: Debuggers 1/12
by Bob Moench 11 Jan '17

11 Jan '17

I would love to hear your clear summary, John (and see if there is agreement), so sooth your throat somehow and present away. I look forward to it. Bob On Wed, 11 Jan 2017, John DelSignore wrote: > > The timing is unfortunate because I have a very sore throat (ï¿½:-( ), but > tomorrow I can do a presentation on work that Ralph and I did during > December. I gave this presentation to some folks at Rogue Wave to fill them > in regarding what is going on in the MPIWG-Tools, MPIR1, MPIR2, PMIx, and > how it relates to TotalView. I think it does a semi-decent job at > summarizing where we are as a group, my current thinking on the direction we > could go, and the results of Ralph's work to add debugging support to the > PMIx reference server. > > Cheers, John D. > > > On 01/11/17 16:06, Mohror, Kathryn wrote: > Hi all, > ï¿½ > This is a reminder of our regularly scheduled Tools WG meeting > tomorrow 1/12 at 8:00 AM PST, 11 AM EST, 5 PM MEZ. > ï¿½ > Meeting connection information is here: > https://github.com/mpiwg-tools/tools-issues/wiki/Meetings > ï¿½ > I don?t really have a clear agenda since it?s been a while since we > talked. I think we?ll touch base on where we are ? a couple of folks have > been working on the side on this ? on how we can layer an MPIR2 on top > of what PMIx has and then move onto more MPI-specific parts of the > interface. > ï¿½ > Talk with you tomorrow! > Kathryn > ï¿½ > ï¿½ > _________________________________________________________________ > Kathryn Mohror, kathryn(a)llnl.gov, http://scalability.llnl.gov/ > Scalability Team @ Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, > CA, USA > ï¿½ > ï¿½ > ï¿½ > > > _______________________________________________ > mpiwg-tools mailing list > mpiwg-tools(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > https://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo/mpiwg-tools > > > > -- Bob Moench (rwm); PE Debugger Development; 605-9034; 354-7895; SP 161221

1 0

Re: [mpiwg-tools] Meeting reminder: Debuggers 1/12
by John DelSignore 11 Jan '17

11 Jan '17

1 0

Meeting reminder: Debuggers 1/12
by Mohror, Kathryn 11 Jan '17

11 Jan '17

Hi all, This is a reminder of our regularly scheduled Tools WG meeting tomorrow 1/12 at 8:00 AM PST, 11 AM EST, 5 PM MEZ. Meeting connection information is here: https://github.com/mpiwg-tools/tools-issues/wiki/Meetings I don't really have a clear agenda since it's been a while since we talked. I think we'll touch base on where we are - a couple of folks have been working on the side on this - on how we can layer an MPIR2 on top of what PMIx has and then move onto more MPI-specific parts of the interface. Talk with you tomorrow! Kathryn _________________________________________________________________ Kathryn Mohror, kathryn(a)llnl.gov<mailto:[email protected]>, http://scalability.llnl.gov/ Scalability Team @ Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA, USA

1 0

Tools topics meeting reminder 1/05
by Marc-Andre Hermanns 05 Jan '17

05 Jan '17

Dear all, a happy new year to all of you. This is the gentle reminder that we want to start of our calls this year with a session on *Performance Tools*: Thursday Jan 5, 2017 11 a.m. Eastern Time (*today*) Here is the webex link: https://cisco.webex.com/ciscosales/j.php?MTID=m0fb3e4a68162bff5874849e4700b… Agenda: - MPI_T events Cheers, Marc-Andre -- Marc-Andre Hermanns Jülich Aachen Research Alliance, High Performance Computing (JARA-HPC) Jülich Supercomputing Centre (JSC) Wilhelm-Johnen-Str. 52425 Jülich Germany Phone: +49 2461 61 2509 | +49 241 80 24381 Fax: +49 2461 80 6 99753 www.jara.org/jara-hpc email: hermanns(a)jara.rwth-aachen.de

1 0