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

Re: [Mpi-22] MPI 2.2 Reminders
by unknown＠example.com 05 Dec '08

05 Dec '08

Maybe the system only had a userid for me, no email address. I have just added the email address. Let's see if I now receive emails for comments added. Rajeev > -----Original Message----- > From: mpi-22-bounces_at_[hidden] > [mailto:mpi-22-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Rajeev Thakur > Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 2:38 PM > To: 'MPI 2.2' > Subject: Re: [Mpi-22] MPI 2.2 Reminders > > BTW, I am not receiving emails for comments made to my > tickets by reviewers > whom I have added in the CC field, i.e., the owner of the > ticket is not > getting an email. > > Rajeev > > _______________________________________________ > mpi-22 mailing list > mpi-22_at_[hidden] > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-22 >

1 0

Re: [Mpi-22] MPI 2.2 Reminders
by unknown＠example.com 05 Dec '08

05 Dec '08

Bill - I have updated my proposal for MPI initialization time assertions (Ticket 22)B. What needs to happen to put it before the Forum for another look? Unfortunately, I will not be able to attend the coming meeting to help explain the rationale in person. 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 *

1 0

Re: [Mpi-22] MPI 2.2 Reminders
by unknown＠example.com 05 Dec '08

05 Dec '08

BTW, I am not receiving emails for comments made to my tickets by reviewers whom I have added in the CC field, i.e., the owner of the ticket is not getting an email. Rajeev

1 0

Re: [Mpi-22] MPI 2.2 Reminders
by unknown＠example.com 05 Dec '08

05 Dec '08

Both solutions (Jeff's and Bill's -- particularly b) work for me. At this point, I have received no emails (either automatic or not) so I will assume nothing is ready for my review until I do. On Fri, 5 Dec 2008, Jeff Squyres wrote: > FWIW, I've been telling people to use the "CC" field to fill in the > email addresses of reviewers. > > Not only does this make a searchable list of reviewers (by e-mail > address, at least), but it also makes them get emails when the ticket > changes. > > It ain't perfect, but it seems to work... > > > On Dec 5, 2008, at 11:07 AM, William Gropp wrote: > > > As an immediate step, we can do the following: > > > > Authors of tickets that are ready for review should do the following: > > (a) add a comment to the ticket with the names of the reviewers (the > > relevant chapter author and 3 other volunteers) > > (b) contact the reviewers to remind them > > > > Having a separate, searchable field would be nice, but this would > > capture the data now. > > > > Bill > > > > On Dec 5, 2008, at 10:00 AM, Bronis R. de Supinski wrote: > > > >> > >> Bill and Jeff: > >> > >> It will be really useful if the tickets listed reviewers. In the > >> least > >> we need some way to map tickets to reviewers (I am thinking about > >> chapter > >> authors in particular), Could Jeff add a field (or fields) that the > >> owner is responsible for completing that indicates the reviewers? > >> > >> As it is I am really unclear over what I am supposed to review. I am > >> guessing there are at least one or two for my chapter... > >> > >> Bronis > >> > >> > >> On Fri, 5 Dec 2008, William Gropp wrote: > >> > >>> Our next MPI 2.2 discussion is in just over a week, and we have a > >>> lot > >>> to do. Please have a look at the wiki for the following (see https:// > >>> svn.mpi-forum.org/trac/mpi-forum-web/report > >>> for the reports): > >>> > >>> 1) For your own tickets, make sure that they are up to date. If > >>> reviewers are needed, please contact them and encourage them to > >>> submit > >>> their reviews. If revised text is needed, please update the text > >>> and > >>> if you would like early feedback, notify this list. > >>> > >>> 2) For items on which you are a reviewer (particularly MPI 2.1 > >>> chapter > >>> authors), please review the relevant tickets. When you are > >>> reviewing > >>> text, make sure that you are looking at the current MPI 2.1 > >>> standard; > >>> check page and line numbers as well as the context to ensure that > >>> the > >>> change is correct. > >>> > >>> 3) For other tickets, review them and raise any issues that you have > >>> *now* so that we can start the discussion before our 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 > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> 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 > > > > 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

Re: [Mpi-22] MPI 2.2 Reminders
by unknown＠example.com 05 Dec '08

05 Dec '08

Hi, It would be great to learn how to identify tickets that are up for review in the first place. All colors and fields I can see in the standard reports don't seem to help much in this. Best regards. Alexander -----Original Message----- From: mpi-22-bounces_at_[hidden] [mailto:mpi-22-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of William Gropp Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 5:07 PM To: Bronis R. de Supinski; MPI 2.2 Subject: Re: [Mpi-22] MPI 2.2 Reminders As an immediate step, we can do the following: Authors of tickets that are ready for review should do the following: (a) add a comment to the ticket with the names of the reviewers (the relevant chapter author and 3 other volunteers) (b) contact the reviewers to remind them Having a separate, searchable field would be nice, but this would capture the data now. Bill On Dec 5, 2008, at 10:00 AM, Bronis R. de Supinski wrote: > > Bill and Jeff: > > It will be really useful if the tickets listed reviewers. In the least > we need some way to map tickets to reviewers (I am thinking about > chapter > authors in particular), Could Jeff add a field (or fields) that the > owner is responsible for completing that indicates the reviewers? > > As it is I am really unclear over what I am supposed to review. I am > guessing there are at least one or two for my chapter... > > Bronis > > > On Fri, 5 Dec 2008, William Gropp wrote: > >> Our next MPI 2.2 discussion is in just over a week, and we have a lot >> to do. Please have a look at the wiki for the following (see https:// >> svn.mpi-forum.org/trac/mpi-forum-web/report >> for the reports): >> >> 1) For your own tickets, make sure that they are up to date. If >> reviewers are needed, please contact them and encourage them to >> submit >> their reviews. If revised text is needed, please update the text and >> if you would like early feedback, notify this list. >> >> 2) For items on which you are a reviewer (particularly MPI 2.1 >> chapter >> authors), please review the relevant tickets. When you are reviewing >> text, make sure that you are looking at the current MPI 2.1 standard; >> check page and line numbers as well as the context to ensure that the >> change is correct. >> >> 3) For other tickets, review them and raise any issues that you have >> *now* so that we can start the discussion before our 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 >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 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 --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 Reminders
by unknown＠example.com 05 Dec '08

05 Dec '08

FWIW, I've been telling people to use the "CC" field to fill in the email addresses of reviewers. Not only does this make a searchable list of reviewers (by e-mail address, at least), but it also makes them get emails when the ticket changes. It ain't perfect, but it seems to work... On Dec 5, 2008, at 11:07 AM, William Gropp wrote: > As an immediate step, we can do the following: > > Authors of tickets that are ready for review should do the following: > (a) add a comment to the ticket with the names of the reviewers (the > relevant chapter author and 3 other volunteers) > (b) contact the reviewers to remind them > > Having a separate, searchable field would be nice, but this would > capture the data now. > > Bill > > On Dec 5, 2008, at 10:00 AM, Bronis R. de Supinski wrote: > >> >> Bill and Jeff: >> >> It will be really useful if the tickets listed reviewers. In the >> least >> we need some way to map tickets to reviewers (I am thinking about >> chapter >> authors in particular), Could Jeff add a field (or fields) that the >> owner is responsible for completing that indicates the reviewers? >> >> As it is I am really unclear over what I am supposed to review. I am >> guessing there are at least one or two for my chapter... >> >> Bronis >> >> >> On Fri, 5 Dec 2008, William Gropp wrote: >> >>> Our next MPI 2.2 discussion is in just over a week, and we have a >>> lot >>> to do. Please have a look at the wiki for the following (see https:// >>> svn.mpi-forum.org/trac/mpi-forum-web/report >>> for the reports): >>> >>> 1) For your own tickets, make sure that they are up to date. If >>> reviewers are needed, please contact them and encourage them to >>> submit >>> their reviews. If revised text is needed, please update the text >>> and >>> if you would like early feedback, notify this list. >>> >>> 2) For items on which you are a reviewer (particularly MPI 2.1 >>> chapter >>> authors), please review the relevant tickets. When you are >>> reviewing >>> text, make sure that you are looking at the current MPI 2.1 >>> standard; >>> check page and line numbers as well as the context to ensure that >>> the >>> change is correct. >>> >>> 3) For other tickets, review them and raise any issues that you have >>> *now* so that we can start the discussion before our 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 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 > > 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

Re: [Mpi-22] MPI 2.2 Reminders
by unknown＠example.com 05 Dec '08

05 Dec '08

As an immediate step, we can do the following: Authors of tickets that are ready for review should do the following: (a) add a comment to the ticket with the names of the reviewers (the relevant chapter author and 3 other volunteers) (b) contact the reviewers to remind them Having a separate, searchable field would be nice, but this would capture the data now. Bill On Dec 5, 2008, at 10:00 AM, Bronis R. de Supinski wrote: > > Bill and Jeff: > > It will be really useful if the tickets listed reviewers. In the least > we need some way to map tickets to reviewers (I am thinking about > chapter > authors in particular), Could Jeff add a field (or fields) that the > owner is responsible for completing that indicates the reviewers? > > As it is I am really unclear over what I am supposed to review. I am > guessing there are at least one or two for my chapter... > > Bronis > > > On Fri, 5 Dec 2008, William Gropp wrote: > >> Our next MPI 2.2 discussion is in just over a week, and we have a lot >> to do. Please have a look at the wiki for the following (see https:// >> svn.mpi-forum.org/trac/mpi-forum-web/report >> for the reports): >> >> 1) For your own tickets, make sure that they are up to date. If >> reviewers are needed, please contact them and encourage them to >> submit >> their reviews. If revised text is needed, please update the text and >> if you would like early feedback, notify this list. >> >> 2) For items on which you are a reviewer (particularly MPI 2.1 >> chapter >> authors), please review the relevant tickets. When you are reviewing >> text, make sure that you are looking at the current MPI 2.1 standard; >> check page and line numbers as well as the context to ensure that the >> change is correct. >> >> 3) For other tickets, review them and raise any issues that you have >> *now* so that we can start the discussion before our 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 >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 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 Reminders
by unknown＠example.com 05 Dec '08

05 Dec '08

Bill and Jeff: It will be really useful if the tickets listed reviewers. In the least we need some way to map tickets to reviewers (I am thinking about chapter authors in particular), Could Jeff add a field (or fields) that the owner is responsible for completing that indicates the reviewers? As it is I am really unclear over what I am supposed to review. I am guessing there are at least one or two for my chapter... Bronis On Fri, 5 Dec 2008, William Gropp wrote: > Our next MPI 2.2 discussion is in just over a week, and we have a lot > to do. Please have a look at the wiki for the following (see https:// svn.mpi-forum.org/trac/mpi-forum-web/report > for the reports): > > 1) For your own tickets, make sure that they are up to date. If > reviewers are needed, please contact them and encourage them to submit > their reviews. If revised text is needed, please update the text and > if you would like early feedback, notify this list. > > 2) For items on which you are a reviewer (particularly MPI 2.1 chapter > authors), please review the relevant tickets. When you are reviewing > text, make sure that you are looking at the current MPI 2.1 standard; > check page and line numbers as well as the context to ensure that the > change is correct. > > 3) For other tickets, review them and raise any issues that you have > *now* so that we can start the discussion before our 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 > > > > > _______________________________________________ > mpi-22 mailing list > mpi-22_at_[hidden] > http:// lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-22 > >

1 0

MPI 2.2 Reminders
by unknown＠example.com 05 Dec '08

05 Dec '08

Our next MPI 2.2 discussion is in just over a week, and we have a lot to do. Please have a look at the wiki for the following (see https://svn.mpi-forum.org/trac/mpi-forum-web/report for the reports): 1) For your own tickets, make sure that they are up to date. If reviewers are needed, please contact them and encourage them to submit their reviews. If revised text is needed, please update the text and if you would like early feedback, notify this list. 2) For items on which you are a reviewer (particularly MPI 2.1 chapter authors), please review the relevant tickets. When you are reviewing text, make sure that you are looking at the current MPI 2.1 standard; check page and line numbers as well as the context to ensure that the change is correct. 3) For other tickets, review them and raise any issues that you have *now* so that we can start the discussion before our 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] Should all constants/types beavailablein all languagebindings?
by unknown＠example.com 24 Oct '08

24 Oct '08

Hi, Yes, it appears that if p483:46-47 are to be interpreted literally, any implementation that does not provide all datatypes in all languages will be non-compliant with MPI-2.1. More on this below. For now, a bit of fun: Re C handle produced out of the Fortran MPI_REAL - imagine it's MPI_FLOAT. Will anything change for the MPI_Send? Probably, no. The datatype signature would be different if the struct was created directly in Fortran, but the MPI_Send would not suffer a jot. Re MPI_Fint, C++ defines to many C++ entities that have C equivalents, like MPI::REAL, MPI::SEEK_SET, etc. Why should the user rely on MPI_Fint then? More generally, where is the boundary between the C++ and C interfaces, or, how much of C++ should really look like C++? So far I was pulling your let a little. Now it's getting serious. There are four things to consider: 1) Language independent datatype definition - say, MPI_INTEGER (see p27:13). 2) Language binding for the datatype handle representing 1) in actual programs - say, C MPI_Datatype MPI_INTEGER, C++ MPI::INTEGER, and Fortran INTEGER MPI_INTEGER. 3) Internal representation of the MPI datatype inside the MPI library referenced by 1) and 2). 4) Actual format of the data in memory defined by the language and platform, and referenced by 1), 2), and 3). Note that distinction between 1) and 2) sort of justifies existence of so specifically C++ binding MPI::INTEGER for otherwise mundane entities in C and Fortran. The argument for MPI::Fint arises from this observation: if we started to do things C++ way, let's stick to this. And what I was talking about re example in p483 was basically a play between 2) and 4): what is different for the user may actually be the same thing for the platform, in this case - typically a machine word interpreted as a real value. See p. 490 for an acknowledgement of this fact (about nonportable possibility to receive MPI_INTEGER as an MPI_INT). Finally, at the moment a part of the standard (see pp. 27-28) does not seem to differentiate clearly between 1) and 2), while another part (see pp. 483-484) talks about making 1) available in all languages thru 2), and Appendix (pp 494-495) serves as the only definition of the datatype equivalence. This, in addition to practical aspects mentioned in earlier messages, is probably why so many implementations are noncompliant with MPI-2.1. Best regards. Alexander -----Original Message----- From: mpi-22-bounces_at_[hidden] [mailto:mpi-22-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Jeff Squyres Sent: Friday, October 24, 2008 9:13 PM To: MPI 2.2 Subject: Re: [Mpi-22] Should all constants/types beavailablein all languagebindings? On Oct 24, 2008, at 2:03 PM, Supalov, Alexander wrote: > If this requirement is to be interpreted literally, then yes, the > standard must define all datatypes in all languages. However, the > example following this statement shows how an MPI_REAL is transformed > into an equivalent C data type. Whether or not this is indeed MPI_REAL > is not clear. It may well be an MPI_FLOAT. I'm not sure what you mean -- Example 16.16 shows making a combined datatype with 1 C int and the 5 Fortran REALs. The C code never tries to use the values in the R array; it just MPI_SEND's them. Using the MPI_REAL type passed up from Fortran is the right thing to do here (vs. using MPI_FLOAT). Alternatively, if the C code knew that the buffer was 5 reals, it wouldn't need to have a type passed in from Fortran -- just the buffer. Then it could TYPE_CREATE_STRUCT with MPI_INT and MPI_REAL and send using the resulting datatype. That's exactly why the datatypes are supposed to be defined in all languages, right? Not for dereferencing, but for sending/receiving data that originally came from another language. The way I read Hubert's text (p483:46-47), none of us are 2.1 compliant because we don't offer *all* the datatypes in all languages. Right? > By the way, this example shows that MPI::Fint may be necessary: > MPI_Fint > is used here to pass Fortran datatype thru the C function boundary. > Imagine a C++ function. There was a ticket #4 calling for removal of > the > MPI::Fint until it was redefined. Why not use MPI_Fint? -- 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