fly. The process you are running can do whatever you want. Have you
thought about adding a global structure where you directly compute the
informations that are really important rather than writing everything
-down and then processing huge files ?
+down and then processing huge files?
-\subsection faq_C Argh! Do I really have to code in C ?
+\subsection faq_C Argh! Do I really have to code in C?
Up until now, there is no binding for other languages. If you use C++,
you should be able to use the SimGrid library as a standard C library
functions for everybody's need when these functions can easily be
built from the ones already in the API. Most of the time, it is
possible and when it was not possible we always have upgraded the API
-accordingly. When somebody asks us a question like "How to do that ?
-Is there a function in the API to simply do this ?", we're always glad
+accordingly. When somebody asks us a question like "How to do that?
+Is there a function in the API to simply do this?", we're always glad
to answer and help. However if we don't need this code for our own
need, there is no chance we're going to write it... it's your job! :)
The counterpart to our answers is that once you come up with a neat
case, please detail what you mean on the mailing list, and we will extend
this FAQ section to fit your taste if possible.
-\subsubsection faq_MIA_communication_time How can I get the *real* communication time ?
+\subsubsection faq_MIA_communication_time How can I get the *real* communication time?
Communications are synchronous and thus if you simply get the time
before and after a communication, you'll only get the transmission
\subsection faq_MIA_SimDag SimDag related questions
-\subsubsection faq_SG Where has SG disappeared?!?
+\subsubsection faq_SG_comm Implementing communication delays between tasks.
+
+A classic question of SimDag newcommers is about how to express a
+communication delay between tasks. The thing is that in SimDag, both
+computation and communication are seen as tasks. So, if you want to
+model a data dependency between two DAG tasks t1 and t2, you have to
+create 3 SD_tasks: t1, t2 and c and add dependencies in the following
+way:
+
+\verbatim
+SD_task_dependency_add(NULL, NULL, t1, c);
+SD_task_dependency_add(NULL, NULL, c, t2);
+\endverbatim
+
+This way task t2 cannot start before the termination of communication c
+which in turn cannot start before t1 ends.
+
+When creating task c, you have to associate an amount of data (in bytes)
+corresponding to what has to be sent by t1 to t2.
+
+Finally to schedule the communication task c, you have to build a list
+comprising the workstations on which t1 and t2 are scheduled (w1 and w2
+for example) and build a communication matrix that should look like
+[0;amount ; 0; 0].
+
+\subsubsection faq_SG_DAG How to implement a distributed dynamic scheduler of DAGs.
+
+Distributed is somehow "contagious". If you start making distributed
+decisions, there is no way to handle DAGs directly anymore (unless I
+am missing something). You have to encode your DAGs in term of
+communicating process to make the whole scheduling process
+distributed. Here is an example of how you could do that. Assume T1
+has to be done before T2.
+
+\verbatim
+ int your_agent(int argc, char *argv[] {
+ ...
+ T1 = MSG_task_create(...);
+ T2 = MSG_task_create(...);
+ ...
+ while(1) {
+ ...
+ if(cond) MSG_task_execute(T1);
+ ...
+ if((MSG_task_get_remaining_computation(T1)=0.0) && (you_re_in_a_good_mood))
+ MSG_task_execute(T2)
+ else {
+ /* do something else */
+ }
+ }
+ }
+\endverbatim
+
+If you decide that the distributed part is not that much important and that
+DAG is really the level of abstraction you want to work with, then you should
+give a try to \ref SD_API.
+
+\subsubsection faq_SG Where has SG disappeared?
OK, it's time to explain what's happening to the SimGrid project. Let's
start with a little bit of history.
an API rather close to the old SG:
\verbatim
-______________________
-| User code |
-|____________________|
-| | MSG | GRAS | SD |
-| -------------------|
-| | SURF |
-| -------------------|
-| XBT |
-----------------------
+_________________________
+| User code |
+|________________________|
+| | MSG | GRAS | SimDag |
+| -----------------------|
+| | SURF |
+| -----------------------|
+| XBT |
+--------------------------
\endverbatim
The nice thing is that, as it is writen on top of SURF, it seamlessly
patterns. Some old codes using SG are currently under rewrite using
\ref SD_API to check that all needful functions are provided.
-\subsubsection faq_SG_DAG How to implement a distributed dynamic scheduler of DAGs.
-
-Distributed is somehow "contagious". If you start making distributed
-decisions, there is no way to handle DAGs directly anymore (unless I
-am missing something). You have to encode your DAGs in term of
-communicating process to make the whole scheduling process
-distributed. Here is an example of how you could do that. Assume T1
-has to be done before T2.
-
-\verbatim
- int your_agent(int argc, char *argv[] {
- ...
- T1 = MSG_task_create(...);
- T2 = MSG_task_create(...);
- ...
- while(1) {
- ...
- if(cond) MSG_task_execute(T1);
- ...
- if((MSG_task_get_remaining_computation(T1)=0.0) && (you_re_in_a_good_mood))
- MSG_task_execute(T2)
- else {
- /* do something else */
- }
- }
- }
-\endverbatim
-
-If you decide that the distributed part is not that much important and that
-DAG is really the level of abstraction you want to work with, then you should
-give a try to \ref SD_API.
-
\subsection faq_MIA_generic Generic features
\subsubsection faq_more_processes Increasing the amount of simulated processes
is too low, you'll get a segfault. The token ring example, which
is quite simple, runs with 40kb stacks.
-\subsubsection faq_MIA_batch_scheduler Is there a native support for batch schedulers in SimGrid ?
+\subsubsection faq_MIA_batch_scheduler Is there a native support for batch schedulers in SimGrid?
No, there is no native support for batch schedulers and none is
planned because this is a very specific need (and doing it in a
<tt>tools/platform_generation/</tt> directory. There is a perl-script
we use to annotate a Tiers generated platform.
-\subsubsection faq_SURF_dynamic Building a dynamic platform, with resource availability?
+\subsubsection faq_SURF_dynamic Building a dynamic platform, with resource availability
A nice feature of SimGrid is that it enables you to seamlessly have
resources whose availability change over time. When you build a
bandwidth_file and latency_file do not express fraction of available
power but are expressed directly in bytes per seconds and seconds.
+\subsubsection faq_platform_multipath Is it possible to have several paths between two given hosts?
+
+The answer is no, unfortunately. Let's consider the following platform
+file:
+
+\verbatim
+<route src="A" dst="B">
+ <route_element name="1"/>
+</route>
+<route src="B" dst="C">
+ <route_element name="2"/>
+</route>
+<route src="A" dst="C">
+ <route_element name="3"/>
+</route>
+\endverbatim
+
+Althrough it is perfectly valid, it does not mean that data traveling
+from A to C can either go directly (using link 3) or through B (using
+links 1 and 2). It simply means that the routing on the graph is not
+trivial, and that data do not following the shortest path in number of
+hops on this graph. Another way to say it is that there is no implicit
+in these routing descriptions. The system will only use the routes you
+declare (such as <route src="A" dst="C"><route_element
+name="3"/></route>), without trying to build new routes by aggregating
+the provided ones.
+
+You are also free to declare platform where the routing is not
+symetric. For example, add the following to the previous file:
+
+\verbatim
+<route src="C" dst="A">
+ <route_element name="2"/>
+ <route_element name="1"/>
+</route>
+\endverbatim
+
+This makes sure that data from C to A go through B where data from A
+to C go directly. Do not worry about realism of such settings since
+we've seen ways more weird situation in real settings.
+
\subsubsection faq_flexml_bypassing Bypassing the XML parser with your own C functions
So you want to bypass the XML files parser, uh? Maybe doin some parameter
\section faq_troubleshooting Troubleshooting
-\subsection faq_trouble_compil Compilation and installation problems
+\subsection faq_trouble_lib_compil SimGrid compilation and installation problems
-\subsubsection faq_trouble_config ./configure fails!
+\subsubsection faq_trouble_lib_config ./configure fails!
We now only one reason for the configure to fail:
that we can check it out. Make sure to read \ref faq_bugrepport
before you do so.
-\subsection faq_trouble_errors Understanding error messages
+\subsection faq_trouble_compil User code compilation problems
\subsubsection faq_trouble_err_logcat "gcc: _simgrid_this_log_category_does_not_exist__??? undeclared (first use in this function)"
for all the details, but you simply forgot to call one of
XBT_LOG_NEW_DEFAULT_CATEGORY() or XBT_LOG_NEW_DEFAULT_SUBCATEGORY().
+\subsubsection faq_trouble_pthreadstatic "gcc: undefinded reference to pthread_key_create"
+
+This indicates that one of the library SimGrid depends on (libpthread
+here) was missing on the linking command line. Dependencies of
+libsimgrid are expressed directly in the dynamic library, so it's
+quite impossible that you see this message when doing dynamic linking.
+
+If you compile your code statically (and if you use a pthread version
+of SimGrid -- see \ref faq_more_processes), you must absolutely
+specify <tt>-lpthread</tt> on the linker command line. As usual, this should
+come after <tt>-lsimgrid</tt> on this command line.
+
+\subsection faq_trouble_errors Runtime error messages
+
\subsubsection faq_flexml_limit "surf_parse_lex: Assertion `next limit' failed."
This is because your platform file is too big for the parser.
