1
1
openmpi/ompi/mca/btl/openib/btl_openib_endpoint.h

400 строки
13 KiB
C
Исходник Обычный вид История

/*
* Copyright (c) 2004-2005 The Trustees of Indiana University and Indiana
* University Research and Technology
* Corporation. All rights reserved.
* Copyright (c) 2004-2006 The University of Tennessee and The University
* of Tennessee Research Foundation. All rights
* reserved.
* Copyright (c) 2004-2005 High Performance Computing Center Stuttgart,
* University of Stuttgart. All rights reserved.
* Copyright (c) 2004-2005 The Regents of the University of California.
* All rights reserved.
This commit brings in two major things: 1. Galen's fine-grain control of queue pair resources in the openib BTL. 1. Pasha's new implementation of asychronous HCA event handling. Pasha's new implementation doesn't take much explanation, but the new "multifrag" stuff does. Note that "svn merge" was not used to bring this new code from the /tmp/ib_multifrag branch -- something Bad happened in the periodic trunk pulls on that branch making an actual merge back to the trunk effectively impossible (i.e., lots and lots of arbitrary conflicts and artifical changes). :-( == Fine-grain control of queue pair resources == Galen's fine-grain control of queue pair resources to the OpenIB BTL (thanks to Gleb for fixing broken code and providing additional functionality, Pasha for finding broken code, and Jeff for doing all the svn work and regression testing). Prior to this commit, the OpenIB BTL created two queue pairs: one for eager size fragments and one for max send size fragments. When the use of the shared receive queue (SRQ) was specified (via "-mca btl_openib_use_srq 1"), these QPs would use a shared receive queue for receive buffers instead of the default per-peer (PP) receive queues and buffers. One consequence of this design is that receive buffer utilization (the size of the data received as a percentage of the receive buffer used for the data) was quite poor for a number of applications. The new design allows multiple QPs to be specified at runtime. Each QP can be setup to use PP or SRQ receive buffers as well as giving fine-grained control over receive buffer size, number of receive buffers to post, when to replenish the receive queue (low water mark) and for SRQ QPs, the number of outstanding sends can also be specified. The following is an example of the syntax to describe QPs to the OpenIB BTL using the new MCA parameter btl_openib_receive_queues: {{{ -mca btl_openib_receive_queues \ "P,128,16,4;S,1024,256,128,32;S,4096,256,128,32;S,65536,256,128,32" }}} Each QP description is delimited by ";" (semicolon) with individual fields of the QP description delimited by "," (comma). The above example therefore describes 4 QPs. The first QP is: P,128,16,4 Meaning: per-peer receive buffer QPs are indicated by a starting field of "P"; the first QP (shown above) is therefore a per-peer based QP. The second field indicates the size of the receive buffer in bytes (128 bytes). The third field indicates the number of receive buffers to allocate to the QP (16). The fourth field indicates the low watermark for receive buffers at which time the BTL will repost receive buffers to the QP (4). The second QP is: S,1024,256,128,32 Shared receive queue based QPs are indicated by a starting field of "S"; the second QP (shown above) is therefore a shared receive queue based QP. The second, third and fourth fields are the same as in the per-peer based QP. The fifth field is the number of outstanding sends that are allowed at a given time on the QP (32). This provides a "good enough" mechanism of flow control for some regular communication patterns. QPs MUST be specified in ascending receive buffer size order. This requirement may be removed prior to 1.3 release. This commit was SVN r15474.
2007-07-18 05:15:59 +04:00
* Copyright (c) 2007 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved.
* Copyright (c) 2006-2007 Los Alamos National Security, LLC. All rights
* reserved.
* Copyright (c) 2006-2007 Voltaire All rights reserved.
* Copyright (c) 2007 Mellanox Technologies. All rights reserved.
* $COPYRIGHT$
*
* Additional copyrights may follow
*
* $HEADER$
*/
#ifndef MCA_BTL_IB_ENDPOINT_H
#define MCA_BTL_IB_ENDPOINT_H
#include "opal/class/opal_list.h"
#include "opal/event/event.h"
#include "ompi/mca/pml/pml.h"
#include "ompi/mca/btl/btl.h"
#include "btl_openib.h"
#include "btl_openib_frag.h"
#include "btl_openib_eager_rdma.h"
#include <errno.h>
#include <string.h>
#include "ompi/mca/btl/base/btl_base_error.h"
#include "connect/base.h"
BEGIN_C_DECLS
struct mca_btl_openib_frag_t;
/**
* State of IB endpoint connection.
*/
typedef enum {
/* Defines the state in which this BTL instance
* has started the process of connection */
MCA_BTL_IB_CONNECTING,
/* Waiting for ack from endpoint */
MCA_BTL_IB_CONNECT_ACK,
This commit brings in two major things: 1. Galen's fine-grain control of queue pair resources in the openib BTL. 1. Pasha's new implementation of asychronous HCA event handling. Pasha's new implementation doesn't take much explanation, but the new "multifrag" stuff does. Note that "svn merge" was not used to bring this new code from the /tmp/ib_multifrag branch -- something Bad happened in the periodic trunk pulls on that branch making an actual merge back to the trunk effectively impossible (i.e., lots and lots of arbitrary conflicts and artifical changes). :-( == Fine-grain control of queue pair resources == Galen's fine-grain control of queue pair resources to the OpenIB BTL (thanks to Gleb for fixing broken code and providing additional functionality, Pasha for finding broken code, and Jeff for doing all the svn work and regression testing). Prior to this commit, the OpenIB BTL created two queue pairs: one for eager size fragments and one for max send size fragments. When the use of the shared receive queue (SRQ) was specified (via "-mca btl_openib_use_srq 1"), these QPs would use a shared receive queue for receive buffers instead of the default per-peer (PP) receive queues and buffers. One consequence of this design is that receive buffer utilization (the size of the data received as a percentage of the receive buffer used for the data) was quite poor for a number of applications. The new design allows multiple QPs to be specified at runtime. Each QP can be setup to use PP or SRQ receive buffers as well as giving fine-grained control over receive buffer size, number of receive buffers to post, when to replenish the receive queue (low water mark) and for SRQ QPs, the number of outstanding sends can also be specified. The following is an example of the syntax to describe QPs to the OpenIB BTL using the new MCA parameter btl_openib_receive_queues: {{{ -mca btl_openib_receive_queues \ "P,128,16,4;S,1024,256,128,32;S,4096,256,128,32;S,65536,256,128,32" }}} Each QP description is delimited by ";" (semicolon) with individual fields of the QP description delimited by "," (comma). The above example therefore describes 4 QPs. The first QP is: P,128,16,4 Meaning: per-peer receive buffer QPs are indicated by a starting field of "P"; the first QP (shown above) is therefore a per-peer based QP. The second field indicates the size of the receive buffer in bytes (128 bytes). The third field indicates the number of receive buffers to allocate to the QP (16). The fourth field indicates the low watermark for receive buffers at which time the BTL will repost receive buffers to the QP (4). The second QP is: S,1024,256,128,32 Shared receive queue based QPs are indicated by a starting field of "S"; the second QP (shown above) is therefore a shared receive queue based QP. The second, third and fourth fields are the same as in the per-peer based QP. The fifth field is the number of outstanding sends that are allowed at a given time on the QP (32). This provides a "good enough" mechanism of flow control for some regular communication patterns. QPs MUST be specified in ascending receive buffer size order. This requirement may be removed prior to 1.3 release. This commit was SVN r15474.
2007-07-18 05:15:59 +04:00
/*Waiting for final connection ACK from endpoint */
MCA_BTL_IB_WAITING_ACK,
/* Connected ... both sender & receiver have
* buffers associated with this connection */
MCA_BTL_IB_CONNECTED,
/* Connection is closed, there are no resources
* associated with this */
MCA_BTL_IB_CLOSED,
/* Maximum number of retries have been used.
* Report failure on send to upper layer */
MCA_BTL_IB_FAILED
} mca_btl_openib_endpoint_state_t;
struct mca_btl_openib_rem_qp_info_t {
uint32_t rem_qp_num;
/* Remote QP number */
uint32_t rem_psn;
/* Remote processes port sequence number */
}; typedef struct mca_btl_openib_rem_qp_info_t mca_btl_openib_rem_qp_info_t;
struct mca_btl_openib_rem_srq_info_t {
/* Remote SRQ number */
uint32_t rem_srq_num;
}; typedef struct mca_btl_openib_rem_srq_info_t mca_btl_openib_rem_srq_info_t;
struct mca_btl_openib_rem_info_t {
uint16_t rem_lid;
/* Local identifier of the remote process */
uint64_t rem_subnet_id;
/* subnet id of remote process */
Bring over all the work from the /tmp/ib-hw-detect branch. In addition to my design and testing, it was conceptually approved by Gil, Gleb, Pasha, Brad, and Galen. Functionally [probably somewhat lightly] tested by Galen. We may still have to shake out some bugs during the next few months, but it seems to be working for all the cases that I can throw at it. Here's a summary of the changes from that branch: * Move MCA parameter registration to a new file (btl_openib_mca.c): * Properly check the retun status of registering MCA params * Check for valid values of MCA parameters * Make help strings better * Otherwise, the only default value of an MCA param that was changed was max_btls; it went from 4 to -1 (meaning: use all available) * Properly prototyped internal functions in _component.c * Made a bunch of functions static that didn't need to be public * Renamed to remove "mca_" prefix from static functions * Call new MCA param registration function * Call new INI file read/lookup/finalize functions * Updated a bunch of macros to be "BTL_" instead of "ORTE_" * Be a little more consistent with return values * Handle -1 for the max_btls MCA param * Fixed a free() that should have been an OBJ_RELEASE() * Some re-indenting * Added INI-file parsing * New flex file: btl_openib_ini.l * New default HCA params .ini file (probably to be expanded over time by other HCA vendors) * Added more show_help messages for parsing problems * Read in INI files and cache the values for later lookup * When component opens an HCA, lookup to see if any corresponding values were found in the INI files (ID'ed by the HCA vendor_id and vendor_part_id) * Added btl_openib_verbose MCA param that shows what the INI-file stuff does (e.g., shows which MTU your HCA ends up using) * Added btl_openib_hca_param_files as a colon-delimited list of INI files to check for values during startup (in order, left-to-right, just like the MCA base directory param). * MTU is currently the only value supported in this framework. * It is not a fatal error if we don't find params for the HCA in the INI file(s). Instead, just print a warning. New MCA param btl_openib_warn_no_hca_params_found can be used to disable printing the warning. * Add MTU to peer negotiation when making a connection * Exchange maximum MTU; select the lesser of the two This commit was SVN r11182.
2006-08-14 23:30:37 +04:00
uint32_t rem_mtu;
This commit brings in two major things: 1. Galen's fine-grain control of queue pair resources in the openib BTL. 1. Pasha's new implementation of asychronous HCA event handling. Pasha's new implementation doesn't take much explanation, but the new "multifrag" stuff does. Note that "svn merge" was not used to bring this new code from the /tmp/ib_multifrag branch -- something Bad happened in the periodic trunk pulls on that branch making an actual merge back to the trunk effectively impossible (i.e., lots and lots of arbitrary conflicts and artifical changes). :-( == Fine-grain control of queue pair resources == Galen's fine-grain control of queue pair resources to the OpenIB BTL (thanks to Gleb for fixing broken code and providing additional functionality, Pasha for finding broken code, and Jeff for doing all the svn work and regression testing). Prior to this commit, the OpenIB BTL created two queue pairs: one for eager size fragments and one for max send size fragments. When the use of the shared receive queue (SRQ) was specified (via "-mca btl_openib_use_srq 1"), these QPs would use a shared receive queue for receive buffers instead of the default per-peer (PP) receive queues and buffers. One consequence of this design is that receive buffer utilization (the size of the data received as a percentage of the receive buffer used for the data) was quite poor for a number of applications. The new design allows multiple QPs to be specified at runtime. Each QP can be setup to use PP or SRQ receive buffers as well as giving fine-grained control over receive buffer size, number of receive buffers to post, when to replenish the receive queue (low water mark) and for SRQ QPs, the number of outstanding sends can also be specified. The following is an example of the syntax to describe QPs to the OpenIB BTL using the new MCA parameter btl_openib_receive_queues: {{{ -mca btl_openib_receive_queues \ "P,128,16,4;S,1024,256,128,32;S,4096,256,128,32;S,65536,256,128,32" }}} Each QP description is delimited by ";" (semicolon) with individual fields of the QP description delimited by "," (comma). The above example therefore describes 4 QPs. The first QP is: P,128,16,4 Meaning: per-peer receive buffer QPs are indicated by a starting field of "P"; the first QP (shown above) is therefore a per-peer based QP. The second field indicates the size of the receive buffer in bytes (128 bytes). The third field indicates the number of receive buffers to allocate to the QP (16). The fourth field indicates the low watermark for receive buffers at which time the BTL will repost receive buffers to the QP (4). The second QP is: S,1024,256,128,32 Shared receive queue based QPs are indicated by a starting field of "S"; the second QP (shown above) is therefore a shared receive queue based QP. The second, third and fourth fields are the same as in the per-peer based QP. The fifth field is the number of outstanding sends that are allowed at a given time on the QP (32). This provides a "good enough" mechanism of flow control for some regular communication patterns. QPs MUST be specified in ascending receive buffer size order. This requirement may be removed prior to 1.3 release. This commit was SVN r15474.
2007-07-18 05:15:59 +04:00
/* MTU of remote process */
uint32_t rem_index;
This commit brings in two major things: 1. Galen's fine-grain control of queue pair resources in the openib BTL. 1. Pasha's new implementation of asychronous HCA event handling. Pasha's new implementation doesn't take much explanation, but the new "multifrag" stuff does. Note that "svn merge" was not used to bring this new code from the /tmp/ib_multifrag branch -- something Bad happened in the periodic trunk pulls on that branch making an actual merge back to the trunk effectively impossible (i.e., lots and lots of arbitrary conflicts and artifical changes). :-( == Fine-grain control of queue pair resources == Galen's fine-grain control of queue pair resources to the OpenIB BTL (thanks to Gleb for fixing broken code and providing additional functionality, Pasha for finding broken code, and Jeff for doing all the svn work and regression testing). Prior to this commit, the OpenIB BTL created two queue pairs: one for eager size fragments and one for max send size fragments. When the use of the shared receive queue (SRQ) was specified (via "-mca btl_openib_use_srq 1"), these QPs would use a shared receive queue for receive buffers instead of the default per-peer (PP) receive queues and buffers. One consequence of this design is that receive buffer utilization (the size of the data received as a percentage of the receive buffer used for the data) was quite poor for a number of applications. The new design allows multiple QPs to be specified at runtime. Each QP can be setup to use PP or SRQ receive buffers as well as giving fine-grained control over receive buffer size, number of receive buffers to post, when to replenish the receive queue (low water mark) and for SRQ QPs, the number of outstanding sends can also be specified. The following is an example of the syntax to describe QPs to the OpenIB BTL using the new MCA parameter btl_openib_receive_queues: {{{ -mca btl_openib_receive_queues \ "P,128,16,4;S,1024,256,128,32;S,4096,256,128,32;S,65536,256,128,32" }}} Each QP description is delimited by ";" (semicolon) with individual fields of the QP description delimited by "," (comma). The above example therefore describes 4 QPs. The first QP is: P,128,16,4 Meaning: per-peer receive buffer QPs are indicated by a starting field of "P"; the first QP (shown above) is therefore a per-peer based QP. The second field indicates the size of the receive buffer in bytes (128 bytes). The third field indicates the number of receive buffers to allocate to the QP (16). The fourth field indicates the low watermark for receive buffers at which time the BTL will repost receive buffers to the QP (4). The second QP is: S,1024,256,128,32 Shared receive queue based QPs are indicated by a starting field of "S"; the second QP (shown above) is therefore a shared receive queue based QP. The second, third and fourth fields are the same as in the per-peer based QP. The fifth field is the number of outstanding sends that are allowed at a given time on the QP (32). This provides a "good enough" mechanism of flow control for some regular communication patterns. QPs MUST be specified in ascending receive buffer size order. This requirement may be removed prior to 1.3 release. This commit was SVN r15474.
2007-07-18 05:15:59 +04:00
/* index of remote endpoint in endpoint array */
mca_btl_openib_rem_qp_info_t *rem_qps;
/* remote xrc_srq info , used only with xrc connections */
mca_btl_openib_rem_srq_info_t *rem_srqs;
}; typedef struct mca_btl_openib_rem_info_t mca_btl_openib_rem_info_t;
This commit brings in two major things: 1. Galen's fine-grain control of queue pair resources in the openib BTL. 1. Pasha's new implementation of asychronous HCA event handling. Pasha's new implementation doesn't take much explanation, but the new "multifrag" stuff does. Note that "svn merge" was not used to bring this new code from the /tmp/ib_multifrag branch -- something Bad happened in the periodic trunk pulls on that branch making an actual merge back to the trunk effectively impossible (i.e., lots and lots of arbitrary conflicts and artifical changes). :-( == Fine-grain control of queue pair resources == Galen's fine-grain control of queue pair resources to the OpenIB BTL (thanks to Gleb for fixing broken code and providing additional functionality, Pasha for finding broken code, and Jeff for doing all the svn work and regression testing). Prior to this commit, the OpenIB BTL created two queue pairs: one for eager size fragments and one for max send size fragments. When the use of the shared receive queue (SRQ) was specified (via "-mca btl_openib_use_srq 1"), these QPs would use a shared receive queue for receive buffers instead of the default per-peer (PP) receive queues and buffers. One consequence of this design is that receive buffer utilization (the size of the data received as a percentage of the receive buffer used for the data) was quite poor for a number of applications. The new design allows multiple QPs to be specified at runtime. Each QP can be setup to use PP or SRQ receive buffers as well as giving fine-grained control over receive buffer size, number of receive buffers to post, when to replenish the receive queue (low water mark) and for SRQ QPs, the number of outstanding sends can also be specified. The following is an example of the syntax to describe QPs to the OpenIB BTL using the new MCA parameter btl_openib_receive_queues: {{{ -mca btl_openib_receive_queues \ "P,128,16,4;S,1024,256,128,32;S,4096,256,128,32;S,65536,256,128,32" }}} Each QP description is delimited by ";" (semicolon) with individual fields of the QP description delimited by "," (comma). The above example therefore describes 4 QPs. The first QP is: P,128,16,4 Meaning: per-peer receive buffer QPs are indicated by a starting field of "P"; the first QP (shown above) is therefore a per-peer based QP. The second field indicates the size of the receive buffer in bytes (128 bytes). The third field indicates the number of receive buffers to allocate to the QP (16). The fourth field indicates the low watermark for receive buffers at which time the BTL will repost receive buffers to the QP (4). The second QP is: S,1024,256,128,32 Shared receive queue based QPs are indicated by a starting field of "S"; the second QP (shown above) is therefore a shared receive queue based QP. The second, third and fourth fields are the same as in the per-peer based QP. The fifth field is the number of outstanding sends that are allowed at a given time on the QP (32). This provides a "good enough" mechanism of flow control for some regular communication patterns. QPs MUST be specified in ascending receive buffer size order. This requirement may be removed prior to 1.3 release. This commit was SVN r15474.
2007-07-18 05:15:59 +04:00
/**
* Agggregates all per peer qp info for an endpoint
This commit brings in two major things: 1. Galen's fine-grain control of queue pair resources in the openib BTL. 1. Pasha's new implementation of asychronous HCA event handling. Pasha's new implementation doesn't take much explanation, but the new "multifrag" stuff does. Note that "svn merge" was not used to bring this new code from the /tmp/ib_multifrag branch -- something Bad happened in the periodic trunk pulls on that branch making an actual merge back to the trunk effectively impossible (i.e., lots and lots of arbitrary conflicts and artifical changes). :-( == Fine-grain control of queue pair resources == Galen's fine-grain control of queue pair resources to the OpenIB BTL (thanks to Gleb for fixing broken code and providing additional functionality, Pasha for finding broken code, and Jeff for doing all the svn work and regression testing). Prior to this commit, the OpenIB BTL created two queue pairs: one for eager size fragments and one for max send size fragments. When the use of the shared receive queue (SRQ) was specified (via "-mca btl_openib_use_srq 1"), these QPs would use a shared receive queue for receive buffers instead of the default per-peer (PP) receive queues and buffers. One consequence of this design is that receive buffer utilization (the size of the data received as a percentage of the receive buffer used for the data) was quite poor for a number of applications. The new design allows multiple QPs to be specified at runtime. Each QP can be setup to use PP or SRQ receive buffers as well as giving fine-grained control over receive buffer size, number of receive buffers to post, when to replenish the receive queue (low water mark) and for SRQ QPs, the number of outstanding sends can also be specified. The following is an example of the syntax to describe QPs to the OpenIB BTL using the new MCA parameter btl_openib_receive_queues: {{{ -mca btl_openib_receive_queues \ "P,128,16,4;S,1024,256,128,32;S,4096,256,128,32;S,65536,256,128,32" }}} Each QP description is delimited by ";" (semicolon) with individual fields of the QP description delimited by "," (comma). The above example therefore describes 4 QPs. The first QP is: P,128,16,4 Meaning: per-peer receive buffer QPs are indicated by a starting field of "P"; the first QP (shown above) is therefore a per-peer based QP. The second field indicates the size of the receive buffer in bytes (128 bytes). The third field indicates the number of receive buffers to allocate to the QP (16). The fourth field indicates the low watermark for receive buffers at which time the BTL will repost receive buffers to the QP (4). The second QP is: S,1024,256,128,32 Shared receive queue based QPs are indicated by a starting field of "S"; the second QP (shown above) is therefore a shared receive queue based QP. The second, third and fourth fields are the same as in the per-peer based QP. The fifth field is the number of outstanding sends that are allowed at a given time on the QP (32). This provides a "good enough" mechanism of flow control for some regular communication patterns. QPs MUST be specified in ascending receive buffer size order. This requirement may be removed prior to 1.3 release. This commit was SVN r15474.
2007-07-18 05:15:59 +04:00
*/
struct mca_btl_openib_endpoint_pp_qp_t {
int32_t sd_credits; /**< this rank's view of the credits
* available for sending:
* this is the credits granted by the
* remote peer which has some relation to the
* number of receive buffers posted remotely
This commit brings in two major things: 1. Galen's fine-grain control of queue pair resources in the openib BTL. 1. Pasha's new implementation of asychronous HCA event handling. Pasha's new implementation doesn't take much explanation, but the new "multifrag" stuff does. Note that "svn merge" was not used to bring this new code from the /tmp/ib_multifrag branch -- something Bad happened in the periodic trunk pulls on that branch making an actual merge back to the trunk effectively impossible (i.e., lots and lots of arbitrary conflicts and artifical changes). :-( == Fine-grain control of queue pair resources == Galen's fine-grain control of queue pair resources to the OpenIB BTL (thanks to Gleb for fixing broken code and providing additional functionality, Pasha for finding broken code, and Jeff for doing all the svn work and regression testing). Prior to this commit, the OpenIB BTL created two queue pairs: one for eager size fragments and one for max send size fragments. When the use of the shared receive queue (SRQ) was specified (via "-mca btl_openib_use_srq 1"), these QPs would use a shared receive queue for receive buffers instead of the default per-peer (PP) receive queues and buffers. One consequence of this design is that receive buffer utilization (the size of the data received as a percentage of the receive buffer used for the data) was quite poor for a number of applications. The new design allows multiple QPs to be specified at runtime. Each QP can be setup to use PP or SRQ receive buffers as well as giving fine-grained control over receive buffer size, number of receive buffers to post, when to replenish the receive queue (low water mark) and for SRQ QPs, the number of outstanding sends can also be specified. The following is an example of the syntax to describe QPs to the OpenIB BTL using the new MCA parameter btl_openib_receive_queues: {{{ -mca btl_openib_receive_queues \ "P,128,16,4;S,1024,256,128,32;S,4096,256,128,32;S,65536,256,128,32" }}} Each QP description is delimited by ";" (semicolon) with individual fields of the QP description delimited by "," (comma). The above example therefore describes 4 QPs. The first QP is: P,128,16,4 Meaning: per-peer receive buffer QPs are indicated by a starting field of "P"; the first QP (shown above) is therefore a per-peer based QP. The second field indicates the size of the receive buffer in bytes (128 bytes). The third field indicates the number of receive buffers to allocate to the QP (16). The fourth field indicates the low watermark for receive buffers at which time the BTL will repost receive buffers to the QP (4). The second QP is: S,1024,256,128,32 Shared receive queue based QPs are indicated by a starting field of "S"; the second QP (shown above) is therefore a shared receive queue based QP. The second, third and fourth fields are the same as in the per-peer based QP. The fifth field is the number of outstanding sends that are allowed at a given time on the QP (32). This provides a "good enough" mechanism of flow control for some regular communication patterns. QPs MUST be specified in ascending receive buffer size order. This requirement may be removed prior to 1.3 release. This commit was SVN r15474.
2007-07-18 05:15:59 +04:00
*/
int32_t rd_posted; /**< number of descriptors posted to the nic*/
int32_t rd_credits; /**< number of credits to return to peer */
int32_t cm_received; /**< Credit messages received */
int32_t cm_return; /**< how may credits to return */
int32_t cm_sent; /**< Outstanding number of credit messages */
This commit brings in two major things: 1. Galen's fine-grain control of queue pair resources in the openib BTL. 1. Pasha's new implementation of asychronous HCA event handling. Pasha's new implementation doesn't take much explanation, but the new "multifrag" stuff does. Note that "svn merge" was not used to bring this new code from the /tmp/ib_multifrag branch -- something Bad happened in the periodic trunk pulls on that branch making an actual merge back to the trunk effectively impossible (i.e., lots and lots of arbitrary conflicts and artifical changes). :-( == Fine-grain control of queue pair resources == Galen's fine-grain control of queue pair resources to the OpenIB BTL (thanks to Gleb for fixing broken code and providing additional functionality, Pasha for finding broken code, and Jeff for doing all the svn work and regression testing). Prior to this commit, the OpenIB BTL created two queue pairs: one for eager size fragments and one for max send size fragments. When the use of the shared receive queue (SRQ) was specified (via "-mca btl_openib_use_srq 1"), these QPs would use a shared receive queue for receive buffers instead of the default per-peer (PP) receive queues and buffers. One consequence of this design is that receive buffer utilization (the size of the data received as a percentage of the receive buffer used for the data) was quite poor for a number of applications. The new design allows multiple QPs to be specified at runtime. Each QP can be setup to use PP or SRQ receive buffers as well as giving fine-grained control over receive buffer size, number of receive buffers to post, when to replenish the receive queue (low water mark) and for SRQ QPs, the number of outstanding sends can also be specified. The following is an example of the syntax to describe QPs to the OpenIB BTL using the new MCA parameter btl_openib_receive_queues: {{{ -mca btl_openib_receive_queues \ "P,128,16,4;S,1024,256,128,32;S,4096,256,128,32;S,65536,256,128,32" }}} Each QP description is delimited by ";" (semicolon) with individual fields of the QP description delimited by "," (comma). The above example therefore describes 4 QPs. The first QP is: P,128,16,4 Meaning: per-peer receive buffer QPs are indicated by a starting field of "P"; the first QP (shown above) is therefore a per-peer based QP. The second field indicates the size of the receive buffer in bytes (128 bytes). The third field indicates the number of receive buffers to allocate to the QP (16). The fourth field indicates the low watermark for receive buffers at which time the BTL will repost receive buffers to the QP (4). The second QP is: S,1024,256,128,32 Shared receive queue based QPs are indicated by a starting field of "S"; the second QP (shown above) is therefore a shared receive queue based QP. The second, third and fourth fields are the same as in the per-peer based QP. The fifth field is the number of outstanding sends that are allowed at a given time on the QP (32). This provides a "good enough" mechanism of flow control for some regular communication patterns. QPs MUST be specified in ascending receive buffer size order. This requirement may be removed prior to 1.3 release. This commit was SVN r15474.
2007-07-18 05:15:59 +04:00
}; typedef struct mca_btl_openib_endpoint_pp_qp_t mca_btl_openib_endpoint_pp_qp_t;
This commit brings in two major things: 1. Galen's fine-grain control of queue pair resources in the openib BTL. 1. Pasha's new implementation of asychronous HCA event handling. Pasha's new implementation doesn't take much explanation, but the new "multifrag" stuff does. Note that "svn merge" was not used to bring this new code from the /tmp/ib_multifrag branch -- something Bad happened in the periodic trunk pulls on that branch making an actual merge back to the trunk effectively impossible (i.e., lots and lots of arbitrary conflicts and artifical changes). :-( == Fine-grain control of queue pair resources == Galen's fine-grain control of queue pair resources to the OpenIB BTL (thanks to Gleb for fixing broken code and providing additional functionality, Pasha for finding broken code, and Jeff for doing all the svn work and regression testing). Prior to this commit, the OpenIB BTL created two queue pairs: one for eager size fragments and one for max send size fragments. When the use of the shared receive queue (SRQ) was specified (via "-mca btl_openib_use_srq 1"), these QPs would use a shared receive queue for receive buffers instead of the default per-peer (PP) receive queues and buffers. One consequence of this design is that receive buffer utilization (the size of the data received as a percentage of the receive buffer used for the data) was quite poor for a number of applications. The new design allows multiple QPs to be specified at runtime. Each QP can be setup to use PP or SRQ receive buffers as well as giving fine-grained control over receive buffer size, number of receive buffers to post, when to replenish the receive queue (low water mark) and for SRQ QPs, the number of outstanding sends can also be specified. The following is an example of the syntax to describe QPs to the OpenIB BTL using the new MCA parameter btl_openib_receive_queues: {{{ -mca btl_openib_receive_queues \ "P,128,16,4;S,1024,256,128,32;S,4096,256,128,32;S,65536,256,128,32" }}} Each QP description is delimited by ";" (semicolon) with individual fields of the QP description delimited by "," (comma). The above example therefore describes 4 QPs. The first QP is: P,128,16,4 Meaning: per-peer receive buffer QPs are indicated by a starting field of "P"; the first QP (shown above) is therefore a per-peer based QP. The second field indicates the size of the receive buffer in bytes (128 bytes). The third field indicates the number of receive buffers to allocate to the QP (16). The fourth field indicates the low watermark for receive buffers at which time the BTL will repost receive buffers to the QP (4). The second QP is: S,1024,256,128,32 Shared receive queue based QPs are indicated by a starting field of "S"; the second QP (shown above) is therefore a shared receive queue based QP. The second, third and fourth fields are the same as in the per-peer based QP. The fifth field is the number of outstanding sends that are allowed at a given time on the QP (32). This provides a "good enough" mechanism of flow control for some regular communication patterns. QPs MUST be specified in ascending receive buffer size order. This requirement may be removed prior to 1.3 release. This commit was SVN r15474.
2007-07-18 05:15:59 +04:00
/**
* Aggregates all srq qp info for an endpoint
This commit brings in two major things: 1. Galen's fine-grain control of queue pair resources in the openib BTL. 1. Pasha's new implementation of asychronous HCA event handling. Pasha's new implementation doesn't take much explanation, but the new "multifrag" stuff does. Note that "svn merge" was not used to bring this new code from the /tmp/ib_multifrag branch -- something Bad happened in the periodic trunk pulls on that branch making an actual merge back to the trunk effectively impossible (i.e., lots and lots of arbitrary conflicts and artifical changes). :-( == Fine-grain control of queue pair resources == Galen's fine-grain control of queue pair resources to the OpenIB BTL (thanks to Gleb for fixing broken code and providing additional functionality, Pasha for finding broken code, and Jeff for doing all the svn work and regression testing). Prior to this commit, the OpenIB BTL created two queue pairs: one for eager size fragments and one for max send size fragments. When the use of the shared receive queue (SRQ) was specified (via "-mca btl_openib_use_srq 1"), these QPs would use a shared receive queue for receive buffers instead of the default per-peer (PP) receive queues and buffers. One consequence of this design is that receive buffer utilization (the size of the data received as a percentage of the receive buffer used for the data) was quite poor for a number of applications. The new design allows multiple QPs to be specified at runtime. Each QP can be setup to use PP or SRQ receive buffers as well as giving fine-grained control over receive buffer size, number of receive buffers to post, when to replenish the receive queue (low water mark) and for SRQ QPs, the number of outstanding sends can also be specified. The following is an example of the syntax to describe QPs to the OpenIB BTL using the new MCA parameter btl_openib_receive_queues: {{{ -mca btl_openib_receive_queues \ "P,128,16,4;S,1024,256,128,32;S,4096,256,128,32;S,65536,256,128,32" }}} Each QP description is delimited by ";" (semicolon) with individual fields of the QP description delimited by "," (comma). The above example therefore describes 4 QPs. The first QP is: P,128,16,4 Meaning: per-peer receive buffer QPs are indicated by a starting field of "P"; the first QP (shown above) is therefore a per-peer based QP. The second field indicates the size of the receive buffer in bytes (128 bytes). The third field indicates the number of receive buffers to allocate to the QP (16). The fourth field indicates the low watermark for receive buffers at which time the BTL will repost receive buffers to the QP (4). The second QP is: S,1024,256,128,32 Shared receive queue based QPs are indicated by a starting field of "S"; the second QP (shown above) is therefore a shared receive queue based QP. The second, third and fourth fields are the same as in the per-peer based QP. The fifth field is the number of outstanding sends that are allowed at a given time on the QP (32). This provides a "good enough" mechanism of flow control for some regular communication patterns. QPs MUST be specified in ascending receive buffer size order. This requirement may be removed prior to 1.3 release. This commit was SVN r15474.
2007-07-18 05:15:59 +04:00
*/
struct mca_btl_openib_endpoint_srq_qp_t {
This commit brings in two major things: 1. Galen's fine-grain control of queue pair resources in the openib BTL. 1. Pasha's new implementation of asychronous HCA event handling. Pasha's new implementation doesn't take much explanation, but the new "multifrag" stuff does. Note that "svn merge" was not used to bring this new code from the /tmp/ib_multifrag branch -- something Bad happened in the periodic trunk pulls on that branch making an actual merge back to the trunk effectively impossible (i.e., lots and lots of arbitrary conflicts and artifical changes). :-( == Fine-grain control of queue pair resources == Galen's fine-grain control of queue pair resources to the OpenIB BTL (thanks to Gleb for fixing broken code and providing additional functionality, Pasha for finding broken code, and Jeff for doing all the svn work and regression testing). Prior to this commit, the OpenIB BTL created two queue pairs: one for eager size fragments and one for max send size fragments. When the use of the shared receive queue (SRQ) was specified (via "-mca btl_openib_use_srq 1"), these QPs would use a shared receive queue for receive buffers instead of the default per-peer (PP) receive queues and buffers. One consequence of this design is that receive buffer utilization (the size of the data received as a percentage of the receive buffer used for the data) was quite poor for a number of applications. The new design allows multiple QPs to be specified at runtime. Each QP can be setup to use PP or SRQ receive buffers as well as giving fine-grained control over receive buffer size, number of receive buffers to post, when to replenish the receive queue (low water mark) and for SRQ QPs, the number of outstanding sends can also be specified. The following is an example of the syntax to describe QPs to the OpenIB BTL using the new MCA parameter btl_openib_receive_queues: {{{ -mca btl_openib_receive_queues \ "P,128,16,4;S,1024,256,128,32;S,4096,256,128,32;S,65536,256,128,32" }}} Each QP description is delimited by ";" (semicolon) with individual fields of the QP description delimited by "," (comma). The above example therefore describes 4 QPs. The first QP is: P,128,16,4 Meaning: per-peer receive buffer QPs are indicated by a starting field of "P"; the first QP (shown above) is therefore a per-peer based QP. The second field indicates the size of the receive buffer in bytes (128 bytes). The third field indicates the number of receive buffers to allocate to the QP (16). The fourth field indicates the low watermark for receive buffers at which time the BTL will repost receive buffers to the QP (4). The second QP is: S,1024,256,128,32 Shared receive queue based QPs are indicated by a starting field of "S"; the second QP (shown above) is therefore a shared receive queue based QP. The second, third and fourth fields are the same as in the per-peer based QP. The fifth field is the number of outstanding sends that are allowed at a given time on the QP (32). This provides a "good enough" mechanism of flow control for some regular communication patterns. QPs MUST be specified in ascending receive buffer size order. This requirement may be removed prior to 1.3 release. This commit was SVN r15474.
2007-07-18 05:15:59 +04:00
int32_t dummy;
}; typedef struct mca_btl_openib_endpoint_srq_qp_t mca_btl_openib_endpoint_srq_qp_t;
typedef struct mca_btl_openib_qp_t {
struct ibv_qp *lcl_qp;
uint32_t lcl_psn;
This commit brings in two major things: 1. Galen's fine-grain control of queue pair resources in the openib BTL. 1. Pasha's new implementation of asychronous HCA event handling. Pasha's new implementation doesn't take much explanation, but the new "multifrag" stuff does. Note that "svn merge" was not used to bring this new code from the /tmp/ib_multifrag branch -- something Bad happened in the periodic trunk pulls on that branch making an actual merge back to the trunk effectively impossible (i.e., lots and lots of arbitrary conflicts and artifical changes). :-( == Fine-grain control of queue pair resources == Galen's fine-grain control of queue pair resources to the OpenIB BTL (thanks to Gleb for fixing broken code and providing additional functionality, Pasha for finding broken code, and Jeff for doing all the svn work and regression testing). Prior to this commit, the OpenIB BTL created two queue pairs: one for eager size fragments and one for max send size fragments. When the use of the shared receive queue (SRQ) was specified (via "-mca btl_openib_use_srq 1"), these QPs would use a shared receive queue for receive buffers instead of the default per-peer (PP) receive queues and buffers. One consequence of this design is that receive buffer utilization (the size of the data received as a percentage of the receive buffer used for the data) was quite poor for a number of applications. The new design allows multiple QPs to be specified at runtime. Each QP can be setup to use PP or SRQ receive buffers as well as giving fine-grained control over receive buffer size, number of receive buffers to post, when to replenish the receive queue (low water mark) and for SRQ QPs, the number of outstanding sends can also be specified. The following is an example of the syntax to describe QPs to the OpenIB BTL using the new MCA parameter btl_openib_receive_queues: {{{ -mca btl_openib_receive_queues \ "P,128,16,4;S,1024,256,128,32;S,4096,256,128,32;S,65536,256,128,32" }}} Each QP description is delimited by ";" (semicolon) with individual fields of the QP description delimited by "," (comma). The above example therefore describes 4 QPs. The first QP is: P,128,16,4 Meaning: per-peer receive buffer QPs are indicated by a starting field of "P"; the first QP (shown above) is therefore a per-peer based QP. The second field indicates the size of the receive buffer in bytes (128 bytes). The third field indicates the number of receive buffers to allocate to the QP (16). The fourth field indicates the low watermark for receive buffers at which time the BTL will repost receive buffers to the QP (4). The second QP is: S,1024,256,128,32 Shared receive queue based QPs are indicated by a starting field of "S"; the second QP (shown above) is therefore a shared receive queue based QP. The second, third and fourth fields are the same as in the per-peer based QP. The fifth field is the number of outstanding sends that are allowed at a given time on the QP (32). This provides a "good enough" mechanism of flow control for some regular communication patterns. QPs MUST be specified in ascending receive buffer size order. This requirement may be removed prior to 1.3 release. This commit was SVN r15474.
2007-07-18 05:15:59 +04:00
int32_t sd_wqe; /**< number of available send wqe entries */
opal_list_t pending_frags[2]; /**< put fragments here if there is no wqe
available */
int users;
opal_mutex_t lock;
} mca_btl_openib_qp_t;
typedef struct mca_btl_openib_endpoint_qp_t {
mca_btl_openib_qp_t *qp;
opal_list_t pending_frags[2]; /**< put fragment here if there is no credits
available */
int32_t rd_credit_send_lock; /**< Lock credit send fragment */
mca_btl_openib_send_control_frag_t *credit_frag;
This commit brings in two major things: 1. Galen's fine-grain control of queue pair resources in the openib BTL. 1. Pasha's new implementation of asychronous HCA event handling. Pasha's new implementation doesn't take much explanation, but the new "multifrag" stuff does. Note that "svn merge" was not used to bring this new code from the /tmp/ib_multifrag branch -- something Bad happened in the periodic trunk pulls on that branch making an actual merge back to the trunk effectively impossible (i.e., lots and lots of arbitrary conflicts and artifical changes). :-( == Fine-grain control of queue pair resources == Galen's fine-grain control of queue pair resources to the OpenIB BTL (thanks to Gleb for fixing broken code and providing additional functionality, Pasha for finding broken code, and Jeff for doing all the svn work and regression testing). Prior to this commit, the OpenIB BTL created two queue pairs: one for eager size fragments and one for max send size fragments. When the use of the shared receive queue (SRQ) was specified (via "-mca btl_openib_use_srq 1"), these QPs would use a shared receive queue for receive buffers instead of the default per-peer (PP) receive queues and buffers. One consequence of this design is that receive buffer utilization (the size of the data received as a percentage of the receive buffer used for the data) was quite poor for a number of applications. The new design allows multiple QPs to be specified at runtime. Each QP can be setup to use PP or SRQ receive buffers as well as giving fine-grained control over receive buffer size, number of receive buffers to post, when to replenish the receive queue (low water mark) and for SRQ QPs, the number of outstanding sends can also be specified. The following is an example of the syntax to describe QPs to the OpenIB BTL using the new MCA parameter btl_openib_receive_queues: {{{ -mca btl_openib_receive_queues \ "P,128,16,4;S,1024,256,128,32;S,4096,256,128,32;S,65536,256,128,32" }}} Each QP description is delimited by ";" (semicolon) with individual fields of the QP description delimited by "," (comma). The above example therefore describes 4 QPs. The first QP is: P,128,16,4 Meaning: per-peer receive buffer QPs are indicated by a starting field of "P"; the first QP (shown above) is therefore a per-peer based QP. The second field indicates the size of the receive buffer in bytes (128 bytes). The third field indicates the number of receive buffers to allocate to the QP (16). The fourth field indicates the low watermark for receive buffers at which time the BTL will repost receive buffers to the QP (4). The second QP is: S,1024,256,128,32 Shared receive queue based QPs are indicated by a starting field of "S"; the second QP (shown above) is therefore a shared receive queue based QP. The second, third and fourth fields are the same as in the per-peer based QP. The fifth field is the number of outstanding sends that are allowed at a given time on the QP (32). This provides a "good enough" mechanism of flow control for some regular communication patterns. QPs MUST be specified in ascending receive buffer size order. This requirement may be removed prior to 1.3 release. This commit was SVN r15474.
2007-07-18 05:15:59 +04:00
union {
mca_btl_openib_endpoint_srq_qp_t srq_qp;
mca_btl_openib_endpoint_pp_qp_t pp_qp;
} u;
} mca_btl_openib_endpoint_qp_t;
/**
* An abstraction that represents a connection to a endpoint process.
* An instance of mca_btl_base_endpoint_t is associated w/ each process
* and BTL pair at startup. However, connections to the endpoint
* are established dynamically on an as-needed basis:
*/
struct mca_btl_base_endpoint_t {
opal_list_item_t super;
struct mca_btl_openib_module_t* endpoint_btl;
/**< BTL instance that created this connection */
struct mca_btl_openib_proc_t* endpoint_proc;
/**< proc structure corresponding to endpoint */
mca_btl_openib_endpoint_state_t endpoint_state;
/**< current state of the connection */
size_t endpoint_retries;
/**< number of connection retries attempted */
double endpoint_tstamp;
/**< timestamp of when the first connection was attempted */
opal_mutex_t endpoint_lock;
/**< lock for concurrent access to endpoint state */
This commit brings in two major things: 1. Galen's fine-grain control of queue pair resources in the openib BTL. 1. Pasha's new implementation of asychronous HCA event handling. Pasha's new implementation doesn't take much explanation, but the new "multifrag" stuff does. Note that "svn merge" was not used to bring this new code from the /tmp/ib_multifrag branch -- something Bad happened in the periodic trunk pulls on that branch making an actual merge back to the trunk effectively impossible (i.e., lots and lots of arbitrary conflicts and artifical changes). :-( == Fine-grain control of queue pair resources == Galen's fine-grain control of queue pair resources to the OpenIB BTL (thanks to Gleb for fixing broken code and providing additional functionality, Pasha for finding broken code, and Jeff for doing all the svn work and regression testing). Prior to this commit, the OpenIB BTL created two queue pairs: one for eager size fragments and one for max send size fragments. When the use of the shared receive queue (SRQ) was specified (via "-mca btl_openib_use_srq 1"), these QPs would use a shared receive queue for receive buffers instead of the default per-peer (PP) receive queues and buffers. One consequence of this design is that receive buffer utilization (the size of the data received as a percentage of the receive buffer used for the data) was quite poor for a number of applications. The new design allows multiple QPs to be specified at runtime. Each QP can be setup to use PP or SRQ receive buffers as well as giving fine-grained control over receive buffer size, number of receive buffers to post, when to replenish the receive queue (low water mark) and for SRQ QPs, the number of outstanding sends can also be specified. The following is an example of the syntax to describe QPs to the OpenIB BTL using the new MCA parameter btl_openib_receive_queues: {{{ -mca btl_openib_receive_queues \ "P,128,16,4;S,1024,256,128,32;S,4096,256,128,32;S,65536,256,128,32" }}} Each QP description is delimited by ";" (semicolon) with individual fields of the QP description delimited by "," (comma). The above example therefore describes 4 QPs. The first QP is: P,128,16,4 Meaning: per-peer receive buffer QPs are indicated by a starting field of "P"; the first QP (shown above) is therefore a per-peer based QP. The second field indicates the size of the receive buffer in bytes (128 bytes). The third field indicates the number of receive buffers to allocate to the QP (16). The fourth field indicates the low watermark for receive buffers at which time the BTL will repost receive buffers to the QP (4). The second QP is: S,1024,256,128,32 Shared receive queue based QPs are indicated by a starting field of "S"; the second QP (shown above) is therefore a shared receive queue based QP. The second, third and fourth fields are the same as in the per-peer based QP. The fifth field is the number of outstanding sends that are allowed at a given time on the QP (32). This provides a "good enough" mechanism of flow control for some regular communication patterns. QPs MUST be specified in ascending receive buffer size order. This requirement may be removed prior to 1.3 release. This commit was SVN r15474.
2007-07-18 05:15:59 +04:00
opal_list_t pending_lazy_frags;
/**< list of pending frags due to lazy connection establishment
* for this endpotint
This commit brings in two major things: 1. Galen's fine-grain control of queue pair resources in the openib BTL. 1. Pasha's new implementation of asychronous HCA event handling. Pasha's new implementation doesn't take much explanation, but the new "multifrag" stuff does. Note that "svn merge" was not used to bring this new code from the /tmp/ib_multifrag branch -- something Bad happened in the periodic trunk pulls on that branch making an actual merge back to the trunk effectively impossible (i.e., lots and lots of arbitrary conflicts and artifical changes). :-( == Fine-grain control of queue pair resources == Galen's fine-grain control of queue pair resources to the OpenIB BTL (thanks to Gleb for fixing broken code and providing additional functionality, Pasha for finding broken code, and Jeff for doing all the svn work and regression testing). Prior to this commit, the OpenIB BTL created two queue pairs: one for eager size fragments and one for max send size fragments. When the use of the shared receive queue (SRQ) was specified (via "-mca btl_openib_use_srq 1"), these QPs would use a shared receive queue for receive buffers instead of the default per-peer (PP) receive queues and buffers. One consequence of this design is that receive buffer utilization (the size of the data received as a percentage of the receive buffer used for the data) was quite poor for a number of applications. The new design allows multiple QPs to be specified at runtime. Each QP can be setup to use PP or SRQ receive buffers as well as giving fine-grained control over receive buffer size, number of receive buffers to post, when to replenish the receive queue (low water mark) and for SRQ QPs, the number of outstanding sends can also be specified. The following is an example of the syntax to describe QPs to the OpenIB BTL using the new MCA parameter btl_openib_receive_queues: {{{ -mca btl_openib_receive_queues \ "P,128,16,4;S,1024,256,128,32;S,4096,256,128,32;S,65536,256,128,32" }}} Each QP description is delimited by ";" (semicolon) with individual fields of the QP description delimited by "," (comma). The above example therefore describes 4 QPs. The first QP is: P,128,16,4 Meaning: per-peer receive buffer QPs are indicated by a starting field of "P"; the first QP (shown above) is therefore a per-peer based QP. The second field indicates the size of the receive buffer in bytes (128 bytes). The third field indicates the number of receive buffers to allocate to the QP (16). The fourth field indicates the low watermark for receive buffers at which time the BTL will repost receive buffers to the QP (4). The second QP is: S,1024,256,128,32 Shared receive queue based QPs are indicated by a starting field of "S"; the second QP (shown above) is therefore a shared receive queue based QP. The second, third and fourth fields are the same as in the per-peer based QP. The fifth field is the number of outstanding sends that are allowed at a given time on the QP (32). This provides a "good enough" mechanism of flow control for some regular communication patterns. QPs MUST be specified in ascending receive buffer size order. This requirement may be removed prior to 1.3 release. This commit was SVN r15474.
2007-07-18 05:15:59 +04:00
*/
mca_btl_openib_endpoint_qp_t *qps;
uint32_t xrc_recv_qp_num; /* in xrc we will use it as recv qp */
uint32_t xrc_recv_psn;
opal_list_t pending_get_frags; /**< list of pending rget ops */
opal_list_t pending_put_frags; /**< list of pending rput ops */
/* Local processes port sequence number (Low and High) */
int32_t get_tokens; /**< number of available get tokens */
uint64_t subnet_id; /**< subnet id of this endpoint*/
struct ib_address_t *ib_addr; /**< used only for xrc; pointer to struct
that keeps remote port info */
int32_t eager_recv_count; /**< number of eager received */
mca_btl_openib_eager_rdma_remote_t eager_rdma_remote;
/**< info about remote RDMA buffer */
mca_btl_openib_eager_rdma_local_t eager_rdma_local;
/**< info about local RDMA buffer */
int32_t index; /**< index of the endpoint in endpoints array */
/**< frags for sending explicit high priority credits */
bool nbo; /**< does the endpoint require network byte ordering? */
bool use_eager_rdma; /**< use eager rdma for this peer? */
mca_btl_openib_rem_info_t rem_info;
};
typedef struct mca_btl_base_endpoint_t mca_btl_base_endpoint_t;
typedef mca_btl_base_endpoint_t mca_btl_openib_endpoint_t;
OBJ_CLASS_DECLARATION(mca_btl_openib_endpoint_t);
static inline int32_t qp_get_wqe(mca_btl_openib_endpoint_t *ep, const int qp)
{
return OPAL_THREAD_ADD32(&ep->qps[qp].qp->sd_wqe, -1);
}
static inline int32_t qp_put_wqe(mca_btl_openib_endpoint_t *ep, const int qp)
{
return OPAL_THREAD_ADD32(&ep->qps[qp].qp->sd_wqe, 1);
}
int mca_btl_openib_endpoint_send(mca_btl_base_endpoint_t*,
mca_btl_openib_send_frag_t*);
int mca_btl_openib_endpoint_post_send(mca_btl_openib_endpoint_t*,
mca_btl_openib_send_frag_t*);
void mca_btl_openib_endpoint_send_credits(mca_btl_base_endpoint_t*, const int);
void mca_btl_openib_endpoint_connect_eager_rdma(mca_btl_openib_endpoint_t*);
int mca_btl_openib_endpoint_post_recvs(mca_btl_openib_endpoint_t*);
void mca_btl_openib_endpoint_connected(mca_btl_openib_endpoint_t*);
void mca_btl_openib_endpoint_init(mca_btl_openib_module_t*,
mca_btl_base_endpoint_t*);
static inline int post_recvs(mca_btl_base_endpoint_t *ep, const int qp,
const int num_post)
{
int i;
struct ibv_recv_wr *bad_wr, *wr_list = NULL, *wr = NULL;
mca_btl_openib_module_t *openib_btl = ep->endpoint_btl;
if(0 == num_post)
return OMPI_SUCCESS;
for(i = 0; i < num_post; i++) {
int rc;
ompi_free_list_item_t* item;
OMPI_FREE_LIST_WAIT(&openib_btl->hca->qps[qp].recv_free, item, rc);
to_base_frag(item)->base.order = qp;
to_com_frag(item)->endpoint = ep;
if(NULL == wr)
wr = wr_list = &to_recv_frag(item)->rd_desc;
else
wr = wr->next = &to_recv_frag(item)->rd_desc;
}
This commit brings in two major things: 1. Galen's fine-grain control of queue pair resources in the openib BTL. 1. Pasha's new implementation of asychronous HCA event handling. Pasha's new implementation doesn't take much explanation, but the new "multifrag" stuff does. Note that "svn merge" was not used to bring this new code from the /tmp/ib_multifrag branch -- something Bad happened in the periodic trunk pulls on that branch making an actual merge back to the trunk effectively impossible (i.e., lots and lots of arbitrary conflicts and artifical changes). :-( == Fine-grain control of queue pair resources == Galen's fine-grain control of queue pair resources to the OpenIB BTL (thanks to Gleb for fixing broken code and providing additional functionality, Pasha for finding broken code, and Jeff for doing all the svn work and regression testing). Prior to this commit, the OpenIB BTL created two queue pairs: one for eager size fragments and one for max send size fragments. When the use of the shared receive queue (SRQ) was specified (via "-mca btl_openib_use_srq 1"), these QPs would use a shared receive queue for receive buffers instead of the default per-peer (PP) receive queues and buffers. One consequence of this design is that receive buffer utilization (the size of the data received as a percentage of the receive buffer used for the data) was quite poor for a number of applications. The new design allows multiple QPs to be specified at runtime. Each QP can be setup to use PP or SRQ receive buffers as well as giving fine-grained control over receive buffer size, number of receive buffers to post, when to replenish the receive queue (low water mark) and for SRQ QPs, the number of outstanding sends can also be specified. The following is an example of the syntax to describe QPs to the OpenIB BTL using the new MCA parameter btl_openib_receive_queues: {{{ -mca btl_openib_receive_queues \ "P,128,16,4;S,1024,256,128,32;S,4096,256,128,32;S,65536,256,128,32" }}} Each QP description is delimited by ";" (semicolon) with individual fields of the QP description delimited by "," (comma). The above example therefore describes 4 QPs. The first QP is: P,128,16,4 Meaning: per-peer receive buffer QPs are indicated by a starting field of "P"; the first QP (shown above) is therefore a per-peer based QP. The second field indicates the size of the receive buffer in bytes (128 bytes). The third field indicates the number of receive buffers to allocate to the QP (16). The fourth field indicates the low watermark for receive buffers at which time the BTL will repost receive buffers to the QP (4). The second QP is: S,1024,256,128,32 Shared receive queue based QPs are indicated by a starting field of "S"; the second QP (shown above) is therefore a shared receive queue based QP. The second, third and fourth fields are the same as in the per-peer based QP. The fifth field is the number of outstanding sends that are allowed at a given time on the QP (32). This provides a "good enough" mechanism of flow control for some regular communication patterns. QPs MUST be specified in ascending receive buffer size order. This requirement may be removed prior to 1.3 release. This commit was SVN r15474.
2007-07-18 05:15:59 +04:00
wr->next = NULL;
if(!ibv_post_recv(ep->qps[qp].qp->lcl_qp, wr_list, &bad_wr))
return OMPI_SUCCESS;
BTL_ERROR(("error posting receive on qp %d\n", qp));
return OMPI_ERROR;
}
This commit brings in two major things: 1. Galen's fine-grain control of queue pair resources in the openib BTL. 1. Pasha's new implementation of asychronous HCA event handling. Pasha's new implementation doesn't take much explanation, but the new "multifrag" stuff does. Note that "svn merge" was not used to bring this new code from the /tmp/ib_multifrag branch -- something Bad happened in the periodic trunk pulls on that branch making an actual merge back to the trunk effectively impossible (i.e., lots and lots of arbitrary conflicts and artifical changes). :-( == Fine-grain control of queue pair resources == Galen's fine-grain control of queue pair resources to the OpenIB BTL (thanks to Gleb for fixing broken code and providing additional functionality, Pasha for finding broken code, and Jeff for doing all the svn work and regression testing). Prior to this commit, the OpenIB BTL created two queue pairs: one for eager size fragments and one for max send size fragments. When the use of the shared receive queue (SRQ) was specified (via "-mca btl_openib_use_srq 1"), these QPs would use a shared receive queue for receive buffers instead of the default per-peer (PP) receive queues and buffers. One consequence of this design is that receive buffer utilization (the size of the data received as a percentage of the receive buffer used for the data) was quite poor for a number of applications. The new design allows multiple QPs to be specified at runtime. Each QP can be setup to use PP or SRQ receive buffers as well as giving fine-grained control over receive buffer size, number of receive buffers to post, when to replenish the receive queue (low water mark) and for SRQ QPs, the number of outstanding sends can also be specified. The following is an example of the syntax to describe QPs to the OpenIB BTL using the new MCA parameter btl_openib_receive_queues: {{{ -mca btl_openib_receive_queues \ "P,128,16,4;S,1024,256,128,32;S,4096,256,128,32;S,65536,256,128,32" }}} Each QP description is delimited by ";" (semicolon) with individual fields of the QP description delimited by "," (comma). The above example therefore describes 4 QPs. The first QP is: P,128,16,4 Meaning: per-peer receive buffer QPs are indicated by a starting field of "P"; the first QP (shown above) is therefore a per-peer based QP. The second field indicates the size of the receive buffer in bytes (128 bytes). The third field indicates the number of receive buffers to allocate to the QP (16). The fourth field indicates the low watermark for receive buffers at which time the BTL will repost receive buffers to the QP (4). The second QP is: S,1024,256,128,32 Shared receive queue based QPs are indicated by a starting field of "S"; the second QP (shown above) is therefore a shared receive queue based QP. The second, third and fourth fields are the same as in the per-peer based QP. The fifth field is the number of outstanding sends that are allowed at a given time on the QP (32). This provides a "good enough" mechanism of flow control for some regular communication patterns. QPs MUST be specified in ascending receive buffer size order. This requirement may be removed prior to 1.3 release. This commit was SVN r15474.
2007-07-18 05:15:59 +04:00
static inline int mca_btl_openib_endpoint_post_rr_nolock(
mca_btl_base_endpoint_t *ep, const int qp)
{
int rd_rsv = mca_btl_openib_component.qp_infos[qp].u.pp_qp.rd_rsv;
int rd_num = mca_btl_openib_component.qp_infos[qp].rd_num;
int rd_low = mca_btl_openib_component.qp_infos[qp].rd_low;
int cqp = mca_btl_openib_component.credits_qp, rc;
int cm_received = 0, num_post = 0;
assert(BTL_OPENIB_QP_TYPE_PP(qp));
if(ep->qps[qp].u.pp_qp.rd_posted <= rd_low)
num_post = rd_num - ep->qps[qp].u.pp_qp.rd_posted;
assert(num_post >= 0);
if(ep->qps[qp].u.pp_qp.cm_received >= (rd_rsv >> 2))
cm_received = ep->qps[qp].u.pp_qp.cm_received;
if((rc = post_recvs(ep, qp, num_post)) != OMPI_SUCCESS) {
OPAL_THREAD_UNLOCK(&ep->endpoint_lock);
return rc;
This commit brings in two major things: 1. Galen's fine-grain control of queue pair resources in the openib BTL. 1. Pasha's new implementation of asychronous HCA event handling. Pasha's new implementation doesn't take much explanation, but the new "multifrag" stuff does. Note that "svn merge" was not used to bring this new code from the /tmp/ib_multifrag branch -- something Bad happened in the periodic trunk pulls on that branch making an actual merge back to the trunk effectively impossible (i.e., lots and lots of arbitrary conflicts and artifical changes). :-( == Fine-grain control of queue pair resources == Galen's fine-grain control of queue pair resources to the OpenIB BTL (thanks to Gleb for fixing broken code and providing additional functionality, Pasha for finding broken code, and Jeff for doing all the svn work and regression testing). Prior to this commit, the OpenIB BTL created two queue pairs: one for eager size fragments and one for max send size fragments. When the use of the shared receive queue (SRQ) was specified (via "-mca btl_openib_use_srq 1"), these QPs would use a shared receive queue for receive buffers instead of the default per-peer (PP) receive queues and buffers. One consequence of this design is that receive buffer utilization (the size of the data received as a percentage of the receive buffer used for the data) was quite poor for a number of applications. The new design allows multiple QPs to be specified at runtime. Each QP can be setup to use PP or SRQ receive buffers as well as giving fine-grained control over receive buffer size, number of receive buffers to post, when to replenish the receive queue (low water mark) and for SRQ QPs, the number of outstanding sends can also be specified. The following is an example of the syntax to describe QPs to the OpenIB BTL using the new MCA parameter btl_openib_receive_queues: {{{ -mca btl_openib_receive_queues \ "P,128,16,4;S,1024,256,128,32;S,4096,256,128,32;S,65536,256,128,32" }}} Each QP description is delimited by ";" (semicolon) with individual fields of the QP description delimited by "," (comma). The above example therefore describes 4 QPs. The first QP is: P,128,16,4 Meaning: per-peer receive buffer QPs are indicated by a starting field of "P"; the first QP (shown above) is therefore a per-peer based QP. The second field indicates the size of the receive buffer in bytes (128 bytes). The third field indicates the number of receive buffers to allocate to the QP (16). The fourth field indicates the low watermark for receive buffers at which time the BTL will repost receive buffers to the QP (4). The second QP is: S,1024,256,128,32 Shared receive queue based QPs are indicated by a starting field of "S"; the second QP (shown above) is therefore a shared receive queue based QP. The second, third and fourth fields are the same as in the per-peer based QP. The fifth field is the number of outstanding sends that are allowed at a given time on the QP (32). This provides a "good enough" mechanism of flow control for some regular communication patterns. QPs MUST be specified in ascending receive buffer size order. This requirement may be removed prior to 1.3 release. This commit was SVN r15474.
2007-07-18 05:15:59 +04:00
}
OPAL_THREAD_ADD32(&ep->qps[qp].u.pp_qp.rd_posted, num_post);
OPAL_THREAD_ADD32(&ep->qps[qp].u.pp_qp.rd_credits, num_post);
This commit brings in two major things: 1. Galen's fine-grain control of queue pair resources in the openib BTL. 1. Pasha's new implementation of asychronous HCA event handling. Pasha's new implementation doesn't take much explanation, but the new "multifrag" stuff does. Note that "svn merge" was not used to bring this new code from the /tmp/ib_multifrag branch -- something Bad happened in the periodic trunk pulls on that branch making an actual merge back to the trunk effectively impossible (i.e., lots and lots of arbitrary conflicts and artifical changes). :-( == Fine-grain control of queue pair resources == Galen's fine-grain control of queue pair resources to the OpenIB BTL (thanks to Gleb for fixing broken code and providing additional functionality, Pasha for finding broken code, and Jeff for doing all the svn work and regression testing). Prior to this commit, the OpenIB BTL created two queue pairs: one for eager size fragments and one for max send size fragments. When the use of the shared receive queue (SRQ) was specified (via "-mca btl_openib_use_srq 1"), these QPs would use a shared receive queue for receive buffers instead of the default per-peer (PP) receive queues and buffers. One consequence of this design is that receive buffer utilization (the size of the data received as a percentage of the receive buffer used for the data) was quite poor for a number of applications. The new design allows multiple QPs to be specified at runtime. Each QP can be setup to use PP or SRQ receive buffers as well as giving fine-grained control over receive buffer size, number of receive buffers to post, when to replenish the receive queue (low water mark) and for SRQ QPs, the number of outstanding sends can also be specified. The following is an example of the syntax to describe QPs to the OpenIB BTL using the new MCA parameter btl_openib_receive_queues: {{{ -mca btl_openib_receive_queues \ "P,128,16,4;S,1024,256,128,32;S,4096,256,128,32;S,65536,256,128,32" }}} Each QP description is delimited by ";" (semicolon) with individual fields of the QP description delimited by "," (comma). The above example therefore describes 4 QPs. The first QP is: P,128,16,4 Meaning: per-peer receive buffer QPs are indicated by a starting field of "P"; the first QP (shown above) is therefore a per-peer based QP. The second field indicates the size of the receive buffer in bytes (128 bytes). The third field indicates the number of receive buffers to allocate to the QP (16). The fourth field indicates the low watermark for receive buffers at which time the BTL will repost receive buffers to the QP (4). The second QP is: S,1024,256,128,32 Shared receive queue based QPs are indicated by a starting field of "S"; the second QP (shown above) is therefore a shared receive queue based QP. The second, third and fourth fields are the same as in the per-peer based QP. The fifth field is the number of outstanding sends that are allowed at a given time on the QP (32). This provides a "good enough" mechanism of flow control for some regular communication patterns. QPs MUST be specified in ascending receive buffer size order. This requirement may be removed prior to 1.3 release. This commit was SVN r15474.
2007-07-18 05:15:59 +04:00
/* post buffers for credit management on credit management qp */
if((rc = post_recvs(ep, cqp, cm_received)) != OMPI_SUCCESS) {
OPAL_THREAD_UNLOCK(&ep->endpoint_lock);
return rc;
This commit brings in two major things: 1. Galen's fine-grain control of queue pair resources in the openib BTL. 1. Pasha's new implementation of asychronous HCA event handling. Pasha's new implementation doesn't take much explanation, but the new "multifrag" stuff does. Note that "svn merge" was not used to bring this new code from the /tmp/ib_multifrag branch -- something Bad happened in the periodic trunk pulls on that branch making an actual merge back to the trunk effectively impossible (i.e., lots and lots of arbitrary conflicts and artifical changes). :-( == Fine-grain control of queue pair resources == Galen's fine-grain control of queue pair resources to the OpenIB BTL (thanks to Gleb for fixing broken code and providing additional functionality, Pasha for finding broken code, and Jeff for doing all the svn work and regression testing). Prior to this commit, the OpenIB BTL created two queue pairs: one for eager size fragments and one for max send size fragments. When the use of the shared receive queue (SRQ) was specified (via "-mca btl_openib_use_srq 1"), these QPs would use a shared receive queue for receive buffers instead of the default per-peer (PP) receive queues and buffers. One consequence of this design is that receive buffer utilization (the size of the data received as a percentage of the receive buffer used for the data) was quite poor for a number of applications. The new design allows multiple QPs to be specified at runtime. Each QP can be setup to use PP or SRQ receive buffers as well as giving fine-grained control over receive buffer size, number of receive buffers to post, when to replenish the receive queue (low water mark) and for SRQ QPs, the number of outstanding sends can also be specified. The following is an example of the syntax to describe QPs to the OpenIB BTL using the new MCA parameter btl_openib_receive_queues: {{{ -mca btl_openib_receive_queues \ "P,128,16,4;S,1024,256,128,32;S,4096,256,128,32;S,65536,256,128,32" }}} Each QP description is delimited by ";" (semicolon) with individual fields of the QP description delimited by "," (comma). The above example therefore describes 4 QPs. The first QP is: P,128,16,4 Meaning: per-peer receive buffer QPs are indicated by a starting field of "P"; the first QP (shown above) is therefore a per-peer based QP. The second field indicates the size of the receive buffer in bytes (128 bytes). The third field indicates the number of receive buffers to allocate to the QP (16). The fourth field indicates the low watermark for receive buffers at which time the BTL will repost receive buffers to the QP (4). The second QP is: S,1024,256,128,32 Shared receive queue based QPs are indicated by a starting field of "S"; the second QP (shown above) is therefore a shared receive queue based QP. The second, third and fourth fields are the same as in the per-peer based QP. The fifth field is the number of outstanding sends that are allowed at a given time on the QP (32). This provides a "good enough" mechanism of flow control for some regular communication patterns. QPs MUST be specified in ascending receive buffer size order. This requirement may be removed prior to 1.3 release. This commit was SVN r15474.
2007-07-18 05:15:59 +04:00
}
OPAL_THREAD_ADD32(&ep->qps[qp].u.pp_qp.cm_return, cm_received);
OPAL_THREAD_ADD32(&ep->qps[qp].u.pp_qp.cm_received, -cm_received);
assert(ep->qps[qp].u.pp_qp.rd_credits <= rd_num &&
ep->qps[qp].u.pp_qp.rd_credits >= 0);
This commit brings in two major things: 1. Galen's fine-grain control of queue pair resources in the openib BTL. 1. Pasha's new implementation of asychronous HCA event handling. Pasha's new implementation doesn't take much explanation, but the new "multifrag" stuff does. Note that "svn merge" was not used to bring this new code from the /tmp/ib_multifrag branch -- something Bad happened in the periodic trunk pulls on that branch making an actual merge back to the trunk effectively impossible (i.e., lots and lots of arbitrary conflicts and artifical changes). :-( == Fine-grain control of queue pair resources == Galen's fine-grain control of queue pair resources to the OpenIB BTL (thanks to Gleb for fixing broken code and providing additional functionality, Pasha for finding broken code, and Jeff for doing all the svn work and regression testing). Prior to this commit, the OpenIB BTL created two queue pairs: one for eager size fragments and one for max send size fragments. When the use of the shared receive queue (SRQ) was specified (via "-mca btl_openib_use_srq 1"), these QPs would use a shared receive queue for receive buffers instead of the default per-peer (PP) receive queues and buffers. One consequence of this design is that receive buffer utilization (the size of the data received as a percentage of the receive buffer used for the data) was quite poor for a number of applications. The new design allows multiple QPs to be specified at runtime. Each QP can be setup to use PP or SRQ receive buffers as well as giving fine-grained control over receive buffer size, number of receive buffers to post, when to replenish the receive queue (low water mark) and for SRQ QPs, the number of outstanding sends can also be specified. The following is an example of the syntax to describe QPs to the OpenIB BTL using the new MCA parameter btl_openib_receive_queues: {{{ -mca btl_openib_receive_queues \ "P,128,16,4;S,1024,256,128,32;S,4096,256,128,32;S,65536,256,128,32" }}} Each QP description is delimited by ";" (semicolon) with individual fields of the QP description delimited by "," (comma). The above example therefore describes 4 QPs. The first QP is: P,128,16,4 Meaning: per-peer receive buffer QPs are indicated by a starting field of "P"; the first QP (shown above) is therefore a per-peer based QP. The second field indicates the size of the receive buffer in bytes (128 bytes). The third field indicates the number of receive buffers to allocate to the QP (16). The fourth field indicates the low watermark for receive buffers at which time the BTL will repost receive buffers to the QP (4). The second QP is: S,1024,256,128,32 Shared receive queue based QPs are indicated by a starting field of "S"; the second QP (shown above) is therefore a shared receive queue based QP. The second, third and fourth fields are the same as in the per-peer based QP. The fifth field is the number of outstanding sends that are allowed at a given time on the QP (32). This provides a "good enough" mechanism of flow control for some regular communication patterns. QPs MUST be specified in ascending receive buffer size order. This requirement may be removed prior to 1.3 release. This commit was SVN r15474.
2007-07-18 05:15:59 +04:00
return OMPI_SUCCESS;
}
static inline int mca_btl_openib_endpoint_post_rr(
mca_btl_base_endpoint_t *ep, const int qp)
{
int ret;
OPAL_THREAD_LOCK(&ep->endpoint_lock);
ret = mca_btl_openib_endpoint_post_rr_nolock(ep, qp);
OPAL_THREAD_UNLOCK(&ep->endpoint_lock);
return ret;
}
#define BTL_OPENIB_CREDITS_SEND_TRYLOCK(E, Q) \
OPAL_ATOMIC_CMPSET_32(&(E)->qps[(Q)].rd_credit_send_lock, 0, 1)
#define BTL_OPENIB_CREDITS_SEND_UNLOCK(E, Q) \
OPAL_ATOMIC_CMPSET_32(&(E)->qps[(Q)].rd_credit_send_lock, 1, 0)
static inline bool check_eager_rdma_credits(const mca_btl_openib_endpoint_t *ep)
{
return (ep->eager_rdma_local.credits > ep->eager_rdma_local.rd_win) ? true :
false;
}
static inline bool
check_send_credits(const mca_btl_openib_endpoint_t *ep, const int qp)
{
if(!BTL_OPENIB_QP_TYPE_PP(qp))
return false;
return (ep->qps[qp].u.pp_qp.rd_credits >=
mca_btl_openib_component.qp_infos[qp].u.pp_qp.rd_win) ? true : false;
}
static inline void send_credits(mca_btl_openib_endpoint_t *ep, int qp)
{
if(BTL_OPENIB_QP_TYPE_PP(qp)) {
if(check_send_credits(ep, qp))
goto try_send;
} else {
qp = mca_btl_openib_component.credits_qp;
}
if(!check_eager_rdma_credits(ep))
return;
try_send:
if(BTL_OPENIB_CREDITS_SEND_TRYLOCK(ep, qp))
mca_btl_openib_endpoint_send_credits(ep, qp);
}
static inline int check_endpoint_state(mca_btl_openib_endpoint_t *ep,
mca_btl_base_descriptor_t *des, opal_list_t *pending_list)
{
int rc = ORTE_ERR_RESOURCE_BUSY;
switch(ep->endpoint_state) {
case MCA_BTL_IB_CLOSED:
rc = ompi_btl_openib_connect.bcf_start_connect(ep);
if(rc == OMPI_SUCCESS)
rc = ORTE_ERR_RESOURCE_BUSY;
/*
* As long as we expect a message from the peer (in order
* to setup the connection) let the event engine pool the
* OOB events. Note: we increment it once peer active
* connection.
*/
opal_progress_event_users_increment();
/* fall through */
default:
opal_list_append(pending_list, (opal_list_item_t *)des);
break;
case MCA_BTL_IB_FAILED:
rc = OMPI_ERR_UNREACH;
break;
case MCA_BTL_IB_CONNECTED:
rc = OMPI_SUCCESS;
break;
}
return rc;
}
static inline __opal_attribute_always_inline__ int
ib_send_flags(uint32_t size, mca_btl_openib_endpoint_t *ep)
{
return IBV_SEND_SIGNALED |
((size <= ep->endpoint_btl->ib_inline_max) ? IBV_SEND_INLINE : 0);
}
END_C_DECLS
#endif