Skip to content

Conversation

tvegas1
Copy link
Contributor

@tvegas1 tvegas1 commented Jun 27, 2025

What?

Do not mandate RMA invalidation on rma_bw lanes if RNDV pipelining will anyways override error handling.

Why?

As error handling is not implemented for RNDV pipelining, there is no need to restrict to transports supporting RMA invalidation.

How?

Check applicable configuration and test with ucx_perftest -e.

if ((ep_init_flags & UCP_EP_INIT_ERR_MODE_PEER_FAILURE) &&
ucp_context_rndv_is_enabled(context)) {
ucp_context_rndv_is_enabled(context) &&
!context->config.ext.rndv_errh_ppln_enable) {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

this fix looks weird.. we don't need invalidation for pipelining protocols since today pipelining protocols do not use it. And we would still need invalidation for zero-copy rndv protocols (if enabled), regardless of config.ext.rndv_errh_ppln_enable

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

this is to avoid creating another var which would allow creating rma_bw lanes even if there is no any transport supporting that

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants