Mike --
What happens when you do this?
----
ibv_fork_init();
int *buffer = malloc(...);
ibv_reg_mr(buffer, ...);
if (fork() != 0) {
// in the child
*buffer = 3;
// ...
}
----
> On Apr 24, 2015, at 2:54 AM, Mike Dubman <mi...@dev.mellanox.co.il> wrote:
>
> btw, ompi master now calls ibv_fork_init() before initializing btl/mtl/oob
> frameworks and all fork fears should be addressed.
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 4:37 AM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) <jsquy...@cisco.com>
> wrote:
> Disable the memory manager / don't use leave pinned. Then you can fork/exec
> without fear (because only MPI will have registered memory -- it'll never
> leave user buffers registered after MPI communications finish).
>
>
> > On Apr 23, 2015, at 9:25 PM, Howard Pritchard <hpprit...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Jeff
> >
> > this is kind of a lanl thing. Jack and I are working offline. any
> > suggestions about openib and fork/exec may be useful however...and don't
> > say no to fork/exec not at least if you dream of mpi in the data center.
> >
> > On Apr 23, 2015 10:49 AM, "Galloway, Jack D" <ja...@lanl.gov> wrote:
> > I am using a “homecooked” cluster at LANL, ~500 cores. There are a whole
> > bunch of fortran system calls doing the copying and pasting. The full code
> > is attached here, a bunch of if-then statements for user options. Thanks
> > for the help.
> >
> >
> >
> > --Jack Galloway
> >
> >
> >
> > From: users [mailto:users-boun...@open-mpi.org] On Behalf Of Howard
> > Pritchard
> > Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2015 8:15 AM
> > To: Open MPI Users
> > Subject: Re: [OMPI users] MPI_Finalize not behaving correctly, orphaned
> > processes
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi Jack,
> >
> > Are you using a system at LANL? Maybe I could try to reproduce the problem
> > on the system you are using. The system call stuff adds a certain bit of
> > zest to the problem. does the app make fortran system calls to do the
> > copying and pasting?
> >
> > Howard
> >
> > On Apr 22, 2015 4:24 PM, "Galloway, Jack D" <ja...@lanl.gov> wrote:
> >
> > I have an MPI program that is fairly straight forward, essentially
> > "initialize, 2 sends from master to slaves, 2 receives on slaves, do a
> > bunch of system calls for copying/pasting then running a serial code on
> > each mpi task, tidy up and mpi finalize".
> >
> > This seems straightforward, but I'm not getting mpi_finalize to work
> > correctly. Below is a snapshot of the program, without all the system
> > copy/paste/call external code which I've rolled up in "do codish stuff"
> > type statements.
> >
> > program mpi_finalize_break
> >
> > !<variable declarations>
> >
> > call MPI_INIT(ierr)
> >
> > icomm = MPI_COMM_WORLD
> >
> > call MPI_COMM_SIZE(icomm,nproc,ierr)
> >
> > call MPI_COMM_RANK(icomm,rank,ierr)
> >
> >
> >
> > !<do codish stuff for a while>
> >
> > if (rank == 0) then
> >
> > !<set up some stuff then call MPI_SEND in a loop over number of slaves>
> >
> > call MPI_SEND(numat,1,MPI_INTEGER,n,0,icomm,ierr)
> >
> > call MPI_SEND(n_to_add,1,MPI_INTEGER,n,0,icomm,ierr)
> >
> > else
> >
> > call MPI_Recv(begin_mat,1,MPI_INTEGER,0,0,icomm,status,ierr)
> >
> > call MPI_Recv(nrepeat,1,MPI_INTEGER,0,0,icomm,status,ierr)
> >
> > !<do codish stuff for a while>
> >
> > endif
> >
> >
> >
> > print*, "got here4", rank
> >
> > call MPI_BARRIER(icomm,ierr)
> >
> > print*, "got here5", rank, ierr
> >
> > call MPI_FINALIZE(ierr)
> >
> >
> >
> > print*, "got here6"
> >
> > end program mpi_finalize_break
> >
> > Now the problem I am seeing occurs around the "got here4", "got here5" and
> > "got here6" statements. I get the appropriate number of print statements
> > with corresponding ranks for "got here4", as well as "got here5". Meaning,
> > the master and all the slaves (rank 0, and all other ranks) got to the
> > barrier call, through the barrier call, and to MPI_FINALIZE, reporting 0
> > for ierr on all of them. However, when it gets to "got here6", after the
> > MPI_FINALIZE I'll get all kinds of weird behavior. Sometimes I'll get one
> > less "got here6" than I expect, or sometimes I'll get eight less (it
> > varies), however the program hangs forever, never closing and leaves an
> > orphaned process on one (or more) of the compute nodes.
> >
> > I am running this on an infiniband backbone machine, with the NFS server
> > shared over infiniband (nfs-rdma). I'm trying to determine how the
> > MPI_BARRIER call works fine, yet MPI_FINALIZE ends up with random orphaned
> > runs (not the same node, nor the same number of orphans every time). I'm
> > guessing it is related to the various system calls to cp, mv,
> > ./run_some_code, cp, mv but wasn't sure if it may be related to the speed
> > of infiniband too, as all this happens fairly quickly. I could have wrong
> > intuition as well. Anybody have thoughts? I could put the whole code if
> > helpful, but this condensed version I believe captures it. I'm running
> > openmpi1.8.4 compiled against ifort 15.0.2 , with Mellanox adapters running
> > firmware 2.9.1000. This is the mellanox firmware available through yum
> > with centos 6.5, 2.6.32-504.8.1.el6.x86_64.
> >
> > ib0 Link encap:InfiniBand HWaddr
> > 80:00:00:48:FE:80:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00
> >
> > inet addr:192.168.6.254 Bcast:192.168.6.255 Mask:255.255.255.0
> >
> > inet6 addr: fe80::202:c903:57:e7fd/64 Scope:Link
> >
> > UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:2044 Metric:1
> >
> > RX packets:10952 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
> >
> > TX packets:9805 errors:0 dropped:625413 overruns:0 carrier:0
> >
> > collisions:0 txqueuelen:256
> >
> > RX bytes:830040 (810.5 KiB) TX bytes:643212 (628.1 KiB)
> >
> >
> >
> > hca_id: mlx4_0
> >
> > transport: InfiniBand (0)
> >
> > fw_ver: 2.9.1000
> >
> > node_guid: 0002:c903:0057:e7fc
> >
> > sys_image_guid: 0002:c903:0057:e7ff
> >
> > vendor_id: 0x02c9
> >
> > vendor_part_id: 26428
> >
> > hw_ver: 0xB0
> >
> > board_id: MT_0D90110009
> >
> > phys_port_cnt: 1
> >
> > port: 1
> >
> > state: PORT_ACTIVE (4)
> >
> > max_mtu: 4096 (5)
> >
> > active_mtu: 4096 (5)
> >
> > sm_lid: 1
> >
> > port_lid: 2
> >
> > port_lmc: 0x00
> >
> > link_layer: InfiniBand
> >
> >
> >
> > This problem only occurs in this simple implementation, thus my thinking it
> > is tied to the system calls. I run several other, much larger, much more
> > robust MPI codes without issue on the machine. Thanks for the help.
> >
> > --Jack
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > users mailing list
> > us...@open-mpi.org
> > Subscription: http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users
> > Link to this post:
> > http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/users/2015/04/26765.php
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > users mailing list
> > us...@open-mpi.org
> > Subscription: http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users
> > Link to this post:
> > http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/users/2015/04/26772.php
> > _______________________________________________
> > users mailing list
> > us...@open-mpi.org
> > Subscription: http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users
> > Link to this post:
> > http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/users/2015/04/26775.php
>
>
> --
> Jeff Squyres
> jsquy...@cisco.com
> For corporate legal information go to:
> http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/
>
> _______________________________________________
> users mailing list
> us...@open-mpi.org
> Subscription: http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users
> Link to this post:
> http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/users/2015/04/26776.php
>
>
>
> --
>
> Kind Regards,
>
> M.
> _______________________________________________
> users mailing list
> us...@open-mpi.org
> Subscription: http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users
> Link to this post:
> http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/users/2015/04/26778.php
--
Jeff Squyres
jsquy...@cisco.com
For corporate legal information go to:
http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/
