Memory allocation/release hooks

[Jeff Hammond]

You don't want to use malloc interception if you care about
portability/interoperability.  For example, see
http://mailman.cse.ohio-state.edu/pipermail/mvapich-discuss/2014-December/005276.html
.

I can't find the archives of madness-developers at googlegroups.com online
(perhaps I am just stupid) but we recently encountered the same issue with
JEMalloc and other MPI implementations.

I understand why it is tempting to intercepting malloc/free for MPI
purposes, but the end result is brittle software that forces users to
disable all the optimizations you are trying to enable.

And it is worth noting that the abuse of malloc/free interception by MPI
developers has forced the MADNESS team (or rather me) to completely bypass
ISO C/C++ language defined heap routines to prevent MPI from hijacking them
and breaking our code.

Anyways, this is in no way a statement about JEMalloc.  The results with
MADNESS indicate this it is the best available allocator around (vs GNU,
TCE and TBB mallocs), but we will have to call it explicitly rather than
via symbol interception.

Best,

Jeff

On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 12:18 PM, Shamis, Pavel <shamisp at ornl.gov> wrote:

> Hi Jeff,
>
> Thanks for the link, seems like a very useful library.
>
> Our goal is a bit different (and very simple/basic).
> We are looking for a malloc library that we can use for integration with
> our registration cache.
> Essentially, it redirects application's malloc() calls to (through
> LD_PRELOAD or rpath) jemalloc that is hooked up with a cache (just like in
> HPX).
> At this stage we don't play with locality.
>
> Thanks !
>
> Pavel (Pasha) Shamis
> ---
> Computer Science Research Group
> Computer Science and Math Division
> Oak Ridge National Laboratory
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Oct 20, 2015, at 11:31 AM, Jeff Hammond <jeff.science at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Pavel,
>
> You may find http://memkind.github.io/memkind/ relevant.  In particular,
> http://memkind.github.io/memkind/memkind_arch_20150318.pdf section 2.2
> and 2.3 discusses exactly the issues you raise.  We also note that memkind
> is intended to support multiple types of memory within a node, such as one
> might encounter in a platform such as Knights Landing.  You are free to
> imagine how it might map to OpenPOWER based upon your superior knowledge of
> that platform :-)
>
> While I recognize that the origins of memkind at Intel may pose a
> challenge for some in the OpenPOWER family, it would be tremendously
> valuable to the community if it was reused for MPI and OpenSHMEM projects,
> rather than the UCX team trying to implement something new.  As you know,
> the both MPI and OpenSHMEM should run on a range of platforms, and it
> doubles the implementation effort in all relevant projects (MPICH, OpenMPI,
> OpenSHMEM reference, etc.) if UCX goes in a different direction.
>
> I would be happy to introduce you to the memkind developers (I am not one
> of them, just someone who helps them understand user/client requirements).
>
> Best,
>
> Jeff
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 8:45 AM, Shamis, Pavel <shamisp at ornl.gov> wrote:
>
>> Dear Jemalloc Community,
>>
>> We are developer of UCX project [1] and as part of the effort
>> we are looking for a malloc library that supports hooks for alloc/dealloc
>> chunks and can be used for the following:
>>
>> (a) Allocation of memory that can be shared transparently between
>> processes on the same node. For this purpose we would like to mmap memory
>> with MAP_SHARED. This is very useful for implementation for Remote Memory
>> Access (RMA) operations in MPI-3 one-sided [2] and OpenSHMEM [3]
>> communication libraries. This allow a remote process to map user allocated
>> memory and provide RMA operations through memcpy().
>>
>> (b) Implementation of memory de-allocation hooks for RDMA hardware
>> (Infiniband, ROCE, iWarp etc.). For optimization purpose we implement a
>> lazy memory de-registration (memory unpinning) policy and we use the hook
>> for the  notification of communication library about memory release event.
>> On the event, we cleanup our registration cache and de-register (unpin) the
>> memory on hardware.
>>
>> Based on this requirements we would like to understand what is the best
>> approach for integration this functionality within jemalloc.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Pasha & Yossi
>>
>> [1] OpenUCX: https://github.com/openucx/ucx or www.openucx.org
>> [2] MPI SPEC: http://www.mpi-forum.org/docs/mpi-3.0/mpi30-report.pdf
>> [3] OpenSHMEM SPEC:
>> http://bongo.cs.uh.edu/site/sites/default/site_files/openshmem-specification-1.2.pdf
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> jemalloc-discuss mailing list
>> jemalloc-discuss at canonware.com
>> http://www.canonware.com/mailman/listinfo/jemalloc-discuss
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Jeff Hammond
> jeff.science at gmail.com
> http://jeffhammond.github.io/
>
>
>


-- 
Jeff Hammond
jeff.science at gmail.com
http://jeffhammond.github.io/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://jemalloc.net/mailman/jemalloc-discuss/attachments/20151020/44461219/attachment-0001.html>