- Mpi-22 - mailman3.cels.anl.gov

Re: [Mpi-22] Another MPI-2.2 attribute ambiguity?
by unknown＠example.com 16 Apr '09

16 Apr '09

On Apr 16, 2009, at 10:29 AM, Solt, David George wrote: > HP-MPI does #2. > > What if the address of the variable originally passed in is no > longer in scope when the corresponding comm_get_attr call is made? > Ya, that can be a problem. Do you have an internal copy of the Intel MPI tests? What does MPI_KEYVAL1_F do? Ours checks that the value of a global variable has been changed by the callbacks. I think that's why we coded it up in Open MPI this way, but I'm not sure (that was a long time ago). -- Jeff Squyres Cisco Systems

1 0

Re: [Mpi-22] Another MPI-2.2 attribute ambiguity?
by unknown＠example.com 16 Apr '09

16 Apr '09

HP-MPI does #2. What if the address of the variable originally passed in is no longer in scope when the corresponding comm_get_attr call is made? Dave -----Original Message----- From: Jeff Squyres [mailto:jsquyres_at_[hidden]] Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2009 9:19 AM To: MPI 2.2; Rajeev Thakur; William Gropp; Rolf Rabenseifner; Hubert Ritzdorf; Terry Dontje; Dave Goodell; Darius Buntinas; Pavan Balaji; Alexander Supalov; Bronis de Supinski; Solt, David George; Hans Westgaard Ry; Håkon Bugge Subject: Another MPI-2.2 attribute ambiguity? This is related to -- but different from -- MPI 2.2 ticket #55 ("MPI-2.1 Cross-language attribute example is wrong"). Explicitly adding all the #55 CC members to this mail, plus a few others. I cannot find any text in MPI-2.1 (e.g., p223-225) describing specific behavior regarding the EXTRA_STATE arguments passed to the Fortran keyval copy and delete functions (both the ADDRESS_KIND and deprecated flavors). I see two choices: 1. pass the user's original EXTRA_STATE argument by reference to the callbacks, or 2. copy the user's original EXTRA_STATE into internal MPI storage and pass *that* value by reference to the callbacks ==> Open MPI currently does #1. What do other implementations do? I raise this issue because the text does not indicate which way is right. And I just ran across an old Sun test that assumed #2. But our internal copy of the Intel MPI tests assume #1 (to be fair: I have no idea if the Intel tests originally assumed #2 and we changed them to #1 over time). Indeed, #2 is actually in-line with the philosophy of storing attribute values in internal MPI storage. E.g.: INTEGER foo = 4 INTEGER bar CALL MPI_COMM_SET_ATTR(comm, keyval, foo, ierr) foo = 5 CALL MPI_COMM_GET_ATTR(comm, keyval, bar, flag, ierr) bar should equal 4, not 5 (right?). So what does that mean (or imply) about the EXTRA_STATE value passed to the Fortran callbacks? -- Jeff Squyres Cisco Systems

1 0

Another MPI-2.2 attribute ambiguity?
by unknown＠example.com 16 Apr '09

16 Apr '09

This is related to -- but different from -- MPI 2.2 ticket #55 ("MPI-2.1 Cross-language attribute example is wrong"). Explicitly adding all the #55 CC members to this mail, plus a few others. I cannot find any text in MPI-2.1 (e.g., p223-225) describing specific behavior regarding the EXTRA_STATE arguments passed to the Fortran keyval copy and delete functions (both the ADDRESS_KIND and deprecated flavors). I see two choices: 1. pass the user's original EXTRA_STATE argument by reference to the callbacks, or 2. copy the user's original EXTRA_STATE into internal MPI storage and pass *that* value by reference to the callbacks ==> Open MPI currently does #1. What do other implementations do? I raise this issue because the text does not indicate which way is right. And I just ran across an old Sun test that assumed #2. But our internal copy of the Intel MPI tests assume #1 (to be fair: I have no idea if the Intel tests originally assumed #2 and we changed them to #1 over time). Indeed, #2 is actually in-line with the philosophy of storing attribute values in internal MPI storage. E.g.: INTEGER foo = 4 INTEGER bar CALL MPI_COMM_SET_ATTR(comm, keyval, foo, ierr) foo = 5 CALL MPI_COMM_GET_ATTR(comm, keyval, bar, flag, ierr) bar should equal 4, not 5 (right?). So what does that mean (or imply) about the EXTRA_STATE value passed to the Fortran callbacks? -- Jeff Squyres Cisco Systems

1 0

Re: [Mpi-22] MPI-2.2 -- change ABI or not?
by unknown＠example.com 07 Apr '09

07 Apr '09

Hi, Thanks. Let me add that there's quite vocal opposition to changing C++ ABI either. Best regards. Alexander -----Original Message----- From: mpi-22-bounces_at_[hidden] [mailto:mpi-22-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Jeff Squyres Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2009 1:19 PM To: MPI 2.2 Subject: Re: [Mpi-22] MPI-2.2 -- change ABI or not? Dick -- Following a round of discussion here in Chicago, there is general consensus on your point. The have decided to give a little leeway on the C++ bindings, though. That is, the C++ ABI may change (e.g., it *has* changed between 2.0 and 2.1) because most MPI's implement the C++ layer as inline functions and therefore don't usually affect the run-time ABI. For example #59 will definitely change the ABI. But right now, those methods *won't compile* in the C++ bindings (because they are wrong), so we can't possibly be breaking any real/user applications. On Apr 6, 2009, at 7:15 AM, Richard Treumann wrote: > Changing the ABI strikes me as a disaster. ( I did not notice this > discussion until just now ) > > If anyone is thinking it is OK for the Forum to cause a 2.1 > application compiled against MPI 2.1 headers to fail on an MPI 2.2 > version of the same implementation or the reverse (2.1 application > compiled with 2.2 headers fails on a 2.1 implementation) then I need > to hear a really good reason. And I mean really, awesomely, > spectacularly, bodacious ) good. > > The user of a parallel application does not always have control over > the level of MPI installed on the systems he uses and does not > always have the source code to recompile. Some people use multiple > systems (same architecture but maybe different MPI version) > > It seems like a very bad idea to tell the user of MPI that he must > upgrade all MPI software he uses on the same day the system admin > installs the MPI 2.2 version of the MPI implementation. > > It seems like an equally bad idea to be telling system admins they > are forbidden to upgrade to the MPI 2.2 version because one of more > critical applications used on the system cannot be easily rebuilt in > MPI 2.2 compatible form. > > If a shop uses only one ISV application then perhaps they can use > the MPI level the ISV specifies but what does a shop that uses > assorted ISV applications do if some vendors stick with MPI 2.1 > headers and others compile for 2.2? > > Dick > > > Dick Treumann - MPI Team > IBM Systems & Technology Group > Dept X2ZA / MS P963 -- 2455 South Road -- Poughkeepsie, NY 12601 > Tele (845) 433-7846 Fax (845) 433-8363 > > > mpi-22-bounces_at_[hidden] wrote on 04/04/2009 12:20:59 PM: > > > [image removed] > > > > [Mpi-22] MPI-2.2 -- change ABI or not? > > > > Jeff Squyres > > > > to: > > > > MPI 2.2 > > > > 04/04/2009 12:25 PM > > > > Sent by: > > > > mpi-22-bounces_at_[hidden] > > > > Please respond to "MPI 2.2" > > > > On Apr 4, 2009, at 9:53 AM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) wrote: > > > > > But the general point may need broad discussion next week -- > have we > > > been sure to adhere to the "must be ABI compatible" rule for all > > > MPI-2.2 issues? > > > > > (changed the subjet to be more accurate) > > > > > > I notice that ticket #5 has already had a 1st reading; it will > > certainly change the ABI. > > > > My point: if we are taking a hard line to make it possible for any > > existing MPI-2.1 application to be able to run against MPI-2.1 and > > MPI-2.2 versions of the same implementation, we will need to review > > all MPI-2.2 tickets. > > > > -- > > Jeff Squyres > > Cisco Systems > > > > _______________________________________________ > > mpi-22 mailing list > > mpi-22_at_[hidden] > > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-22 > _______________________________________________ > mpi-22 mailing list > mpi-22_at_[hidden] > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-22 -- Jeff Squyres Cisco Systems _______________________________________________ mpi-22 mailing list mpi-22_at_[hidden] http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-22 --------------------------------------------------------------------- Intel GmbH Dornacher Strasse 1 85622 Feldkirchen/Muenchen Germany Sitz der Gesellschaft: Feldkirchen bei Muenchen Geschaeftsfuehrer: Douglas Lusk, Peter Gleissner, Hannes Schwaderer Registergericht: Muenchen HRB 47456 Ust.-IdNr. VAT Registration No.: DE129385895 Citibank Frankfurt (BLZ 502 109 00) 600119052 This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.

1 0

Re: [Mpi-22] MPI-2.2 -- change ABI or not?
by unknown＠example.com 07 Apr '09

07 Apr '09

Dick -- Following a round of discussion here in Chicago, there is general consensus on your point. The have decided to give a little leeway on the C++ bindings, though. That is, the C++ ABI may change (e.g., it *has* changed between 2.0 and 2.1) because most MPI's implement the C++ layer as inline functions and therefore don't usually affect the run-time ABI. For example #59 will definitely change the ABI. But right now, those methods *won't compile* in the C++ bindings (because they are wrong), so we can't possibly be breaking any real/user applications. On Apr 6, 2009, at 7:15 AM, Richard Treumann wrote: > Changing the ABI strikes me as a disaster. ( I did not notice this > discussion until just now ) > > If anyone is thinking it is OK for the Forum to cause a 2.1 > application compiled against MPI 2.1 headers to fail on an MPI 2.2 > version of the same implementation or the reverse (2.1 application > compiled with 2.2 headers fails on a 2.1 implementation) then I need > to hear a really good reason. And I mean really, awesomely, > spectacularly, bodacious ) good. > > The user of a parallel application does not always have control over > the level of MPI installed on the systems he uses and does not > always have the source code to recompile. Some people use multiple > systems (same architecture but maybe different MPI version) > > It seems like a very bad idea to tell the user of MPI that he must > upgrade all MPI software he uses on the same day the system admin > installs the MPI 2.2 version of the MPI implementation. > > It seems like an equally bad idea to be telling system admins they > are forbidden to upgrade to the MPI 2.2 version because one of more > critical applications used on the system cannot be easily rebuilt in > MPI 2.2 compatible form. > > If a shop uses only one ISV application then perhaps they can use > the MPI level the ISV specifies but what does a shop that uses > assorted ISV applications do if some vendors stick with MPI 2.1 > headers and others compile for 2.2? > > Dick > > > Dick Treumann - MPI Team > IBM Systems & Technology Group > Dept X2ZA / MS P963 -- 2455 South Road -- Poughkeepsie, NY 12601 > Tele (845) 433-7846 Fax (845) 433-8363 > > > mpi-22-bounces_at_[hidden] wrote on 04/04/2009 12:20:59 PM: > > > [image removed] > > > > [Mpi-22] MPI-2.2 -- change ABI or not? > > > > Jeff Squyres > > > > to: > > > > MPI 2.2 > > > > 04/04/2009 12:25 PM > > > > Sent by: > > > > mpi-22-bounces_at_[hidden] > > > > Please respond to "MPI 2.2" > > > > On Apr 4, 2009, at 9:53 AM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) wrote: > > > > > But the general point may need broad discussion next week -- > have we > > > been sure to adhere to the "must be ABI compatible" rule for all > > > MPI-2.2 issues? > > > > > (changed the subjet to be more accurate) > > > > > > I notice that ticket #5 has already had a 1st reading; it will > > certainly change the ABI. > > > > My point: if we are taking a hard line to make it possible for any > > existing MPI-2.1 application to be able to run against MPI-2.1 and > > MPI-2.2 versions of the same implementation, we will need to review > > all MPI-2.2 tickets. > > > > -- > > Jeff Squyres > > Cisco Systems > > > > _______________________________________________ > > mpi-22 mailing list > > mpi-22_at_[hidden] > > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-22 > _______________________________________________ > mpi-22 mailing list > mpi-22_at_[hidden] > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-22 -- Jeff Squyres Cisco Systems

1 0

Re: [Mpi-22] latex errors
by unknown＠example.com 06 Apr '09

06 Apr '09

[22:03] rtp-jsquyres-8716:~ % echo '\bib' \bib On Apr 6, 2009, at 10:30 AM, William Gropp wrote: > Argh. There are two problems which I'll work on fixing: > 1. It doesn't import the aux file from a full build. > 2. echo has unspecified behavior when the first character is a \ (some > echo's want this to be an escape into an extended character set, and > some don't). > Does echo '\bib' give \bib or ^hib on your system? > > Bill > > On Apr 6, 2009, at 5:59 AM, Jeff Squyres wrote: > > > Bill -- > > > > I get latex errors in any "chap-*" subdirectory when trying to build > > with a vanilla "make". Example: > > > > [6:58] rtp-jsquyres-8716:~/svn/mpi-forum-docs/MPI-2.2 % cd chap- > intro/ > > [6:58] rtp-jsquyres-8716:~/svn/mpi-forum-docs/MPI-2.2/chap-intro % > > make > > rm -f temp.tex > > cat ../chapter-head.tex intro.tex > temp.tex > > if grep \\cite intro.tex ; then \ > > ....etc....... > > LaTeX Warning: Reference `sec:lang' on page 7 undefined on input > line > > 818. > > > > > > LaTeX Warning: Reference `chap:change' on page 7 undefined on input > > line 834. > > > > ! Text line contains an invalid character. > > l.916 ^^H > > ibliographystyle{plain} > > ? > > > > > > > > > > On Apr 5, 2009, at 2:30 PM, MPI Forum wrote: > > > >> #148: Missing entries in the Index pages. > >> --------------------------------- > >> +------------------------------------------ > >> Reporter: RolfRabenseifner | Owner: > >> RolfRabenseifner > >> Type: Trivial text changes | Status: new > >> Priority: Waiting for reviews | Milestone: 2009/04/06 > >> Chicago > >> Version: MPI 2.2 | Resolution: > >> Keywords: | Implementation: Unnecessary > >> --------------------------------- > >> +------------------------------------------ > >> > >> Comment(by gropp): > >> > >> For the chapter authors, there is now a Makefile in each chapter's > >> directory. Running "make" (no options) will built that chapter, > >> including > >> a basic index. This index includes all items for which some index > >> entry > >> will be created; it isn't separated into constant, function, etc. > >> indices. > >> This should make it easier to check your chapter - just print out > the > >> index, then go through each page and make sure that all relevant > >> items > >> appear. > >> > >> -- > >> Ticket URL: <https://svn.mpi-forum.org/trac/mpi-forum-web/ticket/ > >> 148#comment:3 > >>> > >> MPI Forum <https://svn.mpi-forum.org/> > >> MPI Forum > > > > > > -- > > Jeff Squyres > > Cisco Systems > > > > _______________________________________________ > > mpi-22 mailing list > > mpi-22_at_[hidden] > > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-22 > > William Gropp > Deputy Director for Research > Institute for Advanced Computing Applications and Technologies > Paul and Cynthia Saylor Professor of Computer Science > University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign > > > > > _______________________________________________ > mpi-22 mailing list > mpi-22_at_[hidden] > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-22 > -- Jeff Squyres Cisco Systems

1 0

MPI 2.2 lists of participants and organizations (front matter for MPI 2.2)
by unknown＠example.com 06 Apr '09

06 Apr '09

Please have a look at https://svn.mpi-forum.org/trac/mpi-forum-web/ticket/77 . This list the participants and their institutions; it is your responsibility to make sure that you and your organization are correctly listed. We will be giving this a first reading at this meeting. Thanks! Bill William Gropp Deputy Director for Research Institute for Advanced Computing Applications and Technologies Paul and Cynthia Saylor Professor of Computer Science University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign

1 0

Re: [Mpi-22] latex errors
by unknown＠example.com 06 Apr '09

06 Apr '09

Argh. There are two problems which I'll work on fixing: 1. It doesn't import the aux file from a full build. 2. echo has unspecified behavior when the first character is a \ (some echo's want this to be an escape into an extended character set, and some don't). Does echo '\bib' give \bib or ^hib on your system? Bill On Apr 6, 2009, at 5:59 AM, Jeff Squyres wrote: > Bill -- > > I get latex errors in any "chap-*" subdirectory when trying to build > with a vanilla "make". Example: > > [6:58] rtp-jsquyres-8716:~/svn/mpi-forum-docs/MPI-2.2 % cd chap-intro/ > [6:58] rtp-jsquyres-8716:~/svn/mpi-forum-docs/MPI-2.2/chap-intro % > make > rm -f temp.tex > cat ../chapter-head.tex intro.tex > temp.tex > if grep \\cite intro.tex ; then \ > ....etc....... > LaTeX Warning: Reference `sec:lang' on page 7 undefined on input line > 818. > > > LaTeX Warning: Reference `chap:change' on page 7 undefined on input > line 834. > > ! Text line contains an invalid character. > l.916 ^^H > ibliographystyle{plain} > ? > > > > > On Apr 5, 2009, at 2:30 PM, MPI Forum wrote: > >> #148: Missing entries in the Index pages. >> --------------------------------- >> +------------------------------------------ >> Reporter: RolfRabenseifner | Owner: >> RolfRabenseifner >> Type: Trivial text changes | Status: new >> Priority: Waiting for reviews | Milestone: 2009/04/06 >> Chicago >> Version: MPI 2.2 | Resolution: >> Keywords: | Implementation: Unnecessary >> --------------------------------- >> +------------------------------------------ >> >> Comment(by gropp): >> >> For the chapter authors, there is now a Makefile in each chapter's >> directory. Running "make" (no options) will built that chapter, >> including >> a basic index. This index includes all items for which some index >> entry >> will be created; it isn't separated into constant, function, etc. >> indices. >> This should make it easier to check your chapter - just print out the >> index, then go through each page and make sure that all relevant >> items >> appear. >> >> -- >> Ticket URL: <https://svn.mpi-forum.org/trac/mpi-forum-web/ticket/ >> 148#comment:3 >>> >> MPI Forum <https://svn.mpi-forum.org/> >> MPI Forum > > > -- > Jeff Squyres > Cisco Systems > > _______________________________________________ > mpi-22 mailing list > mpi-22_at_[hidden] > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-22 William Gropp Deputy Director for Research Institute for Advanced Computing Applications and Technologies Paul and Cynthia Saylor Professor of Computer Science University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign

1 0

Re: [Mpi-22] MPI-2.2 -- change ABI or not?
by unknown＠example.com 06 Apr '09

06 Apr '09

Changing the ABI strikes me as a disaster. ( I did not notice this discussion until just now ) If anyone is thinking it is OK for the Forum to cause a 2.1 application compiled against MPI 2.1 headers to fail on an MPI 2.2 version of the same implementation or the reverse (2.1 application compiled with 2.2 headers fails on a 2.1 implementation) then I need to hear a really good reason. And I mean really, awesomely, spectacularly, bodacious ) good. The user of a parallel application does not always have control over the level of MPI installed on the systems he uses and does not always have the source code to recompile. Some people use multiple systems (same architecture but maybe different MPI version) It seems like a very bad idea to tell the user of MPI that he must upgrade all MPI software he uses on the same day the system admin installs the MPI 2.2 version of the MPI implementation. It seems like an equally bad idea to be telling system admins they are forbidden to upgrade to the MPI 2.2 version because one of more critical applications used on the system cannot be easily rebuilt in MPI 2.2 compatible form. If a shop uses only one ISV application then perhaps they can use the MPI level the ISV specifies but what does a shop that uses assorted ISV applications do if some vendors stick with MPI 2.1 headers and others compile for 2.2? Dick Dick Treumann - MPI Team IBM Systems & Technology Group Dept X2ZA / MS P963 -- 2455 South Road -- Poughkeepsie, NY 12601 Tele (845) 433-7846 Fax (845) 433-8363 mpi-22-bounces_at_[hidden] wrote on 04/04/2009 12:20:59 PM: > [image removed] > > [Mpi-22] MPI-2.2 -- change ABI or not? > > Jeff Squyres > > to: > > MPI 2.2 > > 04/04/2009 12:25 PM > > Sent by: > > mpi-22-bounces_at_[hidden] > > Please respond to "MPI 2.2" > > On Apr 4, 2009, at 9:53 AM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) wrote: > > > But the general point may need broad discussion next week -- have we > > been sure to adhere to the "must be ABI compatible" rule for all > > MPI-2.2 issues? > > > (changed the subjet to be more accurate) > > > I notice that ticket #5 has already had a 1st reading; it will > certainly change the ABI. > > My point: if we are taking a hard line to make it possible for any > existing MPI-2.1 application to be able to run against MPI-2.1 and > MPI-2.2 versions of the same implementation, we will need to review > all MPI-2.2 tickets. > > -- > Jeff Squyres > Cisco Systems > > _______________________________________________ > mpi-22 mailing list > mpi-22_at_[hidden] > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-22 *

1 0

latex errors
by unknown＠example.com 06 Apr '09

06 Apr '09

Bill -- I get latex errors in any "chap-*" subdirectory when trying to build with a vanilla "make". Example: [6:58] rtp-jsquyres-8716:~/svn/mpi-forum-docs/MPI-2.2 % cd chap-intro/ [6:58] rtp-jsquyres-8716:~/svn/mpi-forum-docs/MPI-2.2/chap-intro % make rm -f temp.tex cat ../chapter-head.tex intro.tex > temp.tex if grep \\cite intro.tex ; then \ ....etc....... LaTeX Warning: Reference `sec:lang' on page 7 undefined on input line 818. LaTeX Warning: Reference `chap:change' on page 7 undefined on input line 834. ! Text line contains an invalid character. l.916 ^^H ibliographystyle{plain} ? On Apr 5, 2009, at 2:30 PM, MPI Forum wrote: > #148: Missing entries in the Index pages. > --------------------------------- > +------------------------------------------ > Reporter: RolfRabenseifner | Owner: RolfRabenseifner > Type: Trivial text changes | Status: new > Priority: Waiting for reviews | Milestone: 2009/04/06 > Chicago > Version: MPI 2.2 | Resolution: > Keywords: | Implementation: Unnecessary > --------------------------------- > +------------------------------------------ > > Comment(by gropp): > > For the chapter authors, there is now a Makefile in each chapter's > directory. Running "make" (no options) will built that chapter, > including > a basic index. This index includes all items for which some index > entry > will be created; it isn't separated into constant, function, etc. > indices. > This should make it easier to check your chapter - just print out the > index, then go through each page and make sure that all relevant > items > appear. > > -- > Ticket URL: <https://svn.mpi-forum.org/trac/mpi-forum-web/ticket/148#comment:3 > > > MPI Forum <https://svn.mpi-forum.org/> > MPI Forum -- Jeff Squyres Cisco Systems

1 0