Diego Jiménez
ABSTRACT
High Performance Computing (HPC) is nearing the exascale era and several challenges have to be addressed in terms of application development. Future parallel programming models should not only help developers take full advantage of the underlying machine but they should also account for highly dynamic runtime conditions, including frequent hardware failures. In this paper, we analyze the porting process of a plasma confinement simulator from a traditional MPI+OpenMP approach to a parallel objects based model like Charm++. The main driver for this effort is the existence of load imbalanced input scenarios that pure OpenMP scheduling can not solve. By using Charm++ adaptive runtime and integrated balancing strategies, we were able to increase total CPU usage from 45.2% to 80.2%, achieving a 1.64 × acceleration, after load balancing, over the MPI+OpenMP implementation on a specific input scenario. Checkpointing was added to the simulator thanks to the pack-unpack interface implemented by Charm++, providing scientists with fault tolerance and split execution capabilities.
- Jack Dongarra, Pete Beckman, Terry Moore, Patrick Aerts, Giovanni Aloisio, Jean-Claude Andre, David Barkai, Jean-Yves Berthou, Taisuke Boku, Bertrand Braunschweig, 2011. The international exascale software project roadmap. The international journal of high performance computing applications 25 (2011).Google Scholar
- Al Geist and Robert Lucas. 2009. Major computer science challenges at exascale. The International Journal of High Performance Computing Applications (2009).Google Scholar
- Steven P Hirshman and JC Whitson. 1983. Steepest-descent moment method for three-dimensional magnetohydrodynamic equilibria. The Physics of fluids 26, 12 (1983), 3553–3568.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Chao Huang, Orion Lawlor, and L. V. Kalé. 2003. Adaptive MPI. In Proceedings of the 16th International Workshop on Languages and Compilers for Parallel Computing (LCPC 2003), LNCS 2958. College Station, Texas, 306–322.Google Scholar
- Kaname Ikeda. 2009. ITER on the road to fusion energy. Nuclear Fusion 50, 1 (2009), 014002.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Diego Jiménez, Luis Campos-Duarte, Ricardo Solano-Piedra, Luis Alonso Araya-Solano, Esteban Meneses, and Iván Vargas. 2020. BS-SOLCTRA: Towards a Parallel Magnetic Plasma Confinement Simulation Framework for Modular Stellarator Devices. In High Performance Computing, Juan Luis Crespo-Mariño and Esteban Meneses-Rojas (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 33–48.Google Scholar
- L.V. Kalé and S. Krishnan. 1993. CHARM++: A Portable Concurrent Object Oriented System Based on C++. In Proceedings of OOPSLA’93, A. Paepcke (Ed.). ACM Press, 91–108.Google Scholar
- Alf Köhn. 2010. Investigation of microwave heating scenarios in the magnetically confined low-temperature plasma of the stellarator TJ-K. (2010).Google Scholar
- Samuel Lazerson, John Schmitt, Caoxiang Zhu, Joshua Breslau, STELLOPT Developers, 2020. Stellopt. Technical Report. Princeton Plasma Physics Lab.(PPPL), Princeton, NJ (United States).Google Scholar
- Robert Lucas, James Ang, Keren Bergman, Shekhar Borkar, William Carlson, Laura Carrington, George Chiu, Robert Colwell, William Dally, Jack Dongarra, 2014. DoE Advanced Scientific Computing Advisory Subcommittee (ascac) Report: Top Ten Exascale Research Challenges. Technical Report. US DOE Office of Science (SC)(United States).Google Scholar
- Peter Merkel. 1987. Solution of stellarator boundary value problems with external currents. Nuclear Fusion 27, 5 (1987), 867.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Daniel A Reed and Jack Dongarra. 2015. Exascale computing and big data. Commun. ACM 58, 7 (2015), 56–68.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Francesco Romanelli, P Barabaschi, D Borba, G Federici, L Horton, R Neu, D Stork, and H Zohm. 2012. Fusion Electricity: A roadmap to the realization of fusion energy. (2012).Google Scholar
- Thomas Rummel, Konrad Risse, Michael Nagel, Thomas Mönnich, Frank Füllenbach, and Hans-Stephan Bosch. 2018. Challenges for the Wendelstein 7-X magnet systems during the next operation phase. IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science 46, 5 (2018), 1517–1521.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Thorsten von Eicken, David E. Culler, Seth Copen Goldstein, and Klaus Erik Schauser. 1992. Active Messages: A Mechanism for Integrated Communication and Computation. In Proceedings of the 19th Annual International Symposium on Computer Architecture(Queensland, Australia) (ISCA ’92). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 256–266.Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- Adaptive Plasma Physics Simulations: Dealing with Load Imbalance using Charm++
Recommendations
Integrating OpenMP into the Charm++ Programming Model
ESPM2'17: Proceedings of the Third International Workshop on Extreme Scale Programming Models and MiddlewareThe recent trend of rapid increase in the number of cores per chip has resulted in vast amounts of on-node parallelism. These high core counts result in hardware variability that introduces imbalance. Applications are also becoming more complex ...
Charm++ and MPI: Combining the Best of Both Worlds
IPDPS '15: Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE International Parallel and Distributed Processing SymposiumCharm++ and MPI embody two distinct perspectives for writing parallel programs. While MPI provides a process-centric, user-driven model for developing parallel codes, Charm++ supports work-centric, system-driven parallel programming. One of them might ...
Quantifying Overheads in Charm++ and HPX Using Task Bench
Euro-Par 2022: Parallel Processing WorkshopsAbstractAsynchronous Many-Task (AMT) runtime systems take advantage of multi-core architectures with light-weight threads, asynchronous executions, and smart scheduling. In this paper, we present the comparison of the AMT systems Charm++ and HPX with the ...
Comments