January 2011 - mpi-forum - mailman3.cels.anl.gov

Re: [Mpi-forum] Feb 7-9 MPI Forum meeting
by Graham, Richard L. 10 Jan '11

10 Jan '11

All the details are in place - same hotel as last time, and at Cisco again. The person who was supposed to finish off registration was supposed to be back today, but the lab is closed due to snow, so I hope the registration page will be up tomorrow - there is one correction to the page that needs to be done, and the test records deleted ... Rich On 1/10/11 1:22 PM, "Dave Goodell" <goodell(a)mcs.anl.gov> wrote: Is there any update on this meeting? It's just under one month away, so it would be nice to pin down flights (SFO vs. SJC). -Dave On Dec 1, 2010, at 1:38 PM CST, Graham, Richard L. wrote: > We are starting our planning for the Feb meeting, that is scheduled to take place in the California Bay Area. I am looking for an organization that would be willing and able to host this meeting at their facility. If your organization can do this, please let me know. If we don't have an takers in the next couple of weeks, I will go ahead and plan to hold this meeting at a hotel in the area. > > Thanks in advance, > Rich > > _______________________________________________ > mpi-forum mailing list > mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum _______________________________________________ mpi-forum mailing list mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum

1 0

Re: [Mpi-forum] Feb 7-9 MPI Forum meeting
by Dave Goodell 10 Jan '11

10 Jan '11

Is there any update on this meeting? It's just under one month away, so it would be nice to pin down flights (SFO vs. SJC). -Dave On Dec 1, 2010, at 1:38 PM CST, Graham, Richard L. wrote: > We are starting our planning for the Feb meeting, that is scheduled to take place in the California Bay Area. I am looking for an organization that would be willing and able to host this meeting at their facility. If your organization can do this, please let me know. If we don't have an takers in the next couple of weeks, I will go ahead and plan to hold this meeting at a hotel in the area. > > Thanks in advance, > Rich > > _______________________________________________ > mpi-forum mailing list > mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum

1 0

Re: [Mpi-forum] MPI_SVN_UNLOCK()
by Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) 08 Jan '11

08 Jan '11

Ok. We'll leave it as just the PDFs and ps files in SVN as the archive copies in case the web site gets hit by lightening. Sent from my PDA. No type good. On Jan 8, 2011, at 12:03 PM, "William Gropp" <wgropp(a)illinois.edu> wrote: > I have all of the original MPI 1.0, 1.1, and 2.0 sources, though I don't think its worth working on it. The greatest problem is that, to exactly reproduce the older documents, we need to resurrect an old version of LaTeX :( > > Bill > > On Jan 7, 2011, at 4:39 PM, Jeff Squyres wrote: > >> Most SVN changes are complete; lock released. >> >> Still to do: >> >> 1. set permissions properly (I have to run out right now; I'll do them later tonight, but they're complicated so it may take a few tries to get right -- bear with me if you try to commit and get a permission denied. Send me an email and I'll fix it) >> >> 2. Try to re-create the latex sources for MPI 1.0, 1.1, 1.3, 2.0, 2.1. Although I'm debating as to whether this is worth it... >> >> Please let me know if you run into any problems. Thanks! >> >> -- >> Jeff Squyres >> jsquyres(a)cisco.com >> For corporate legal information go to: >> http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/ >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> mpi-forum mailing list >> mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum > > 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-forum mailing list > mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum

1 0

Re: [Mpi-forum] MPI_SVN_UNLOCK()
by Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) 08 Jan '11

08 Jan '11

Exxxcellent. Sent from my PDA. No type good. On Jan 8, 2011, at 9:39 AM, "Martin Schulz" <schulzm(a)llnl.gov> wrote: > Hi Jeff, > > Just to confirm as well - I can check out the new structure > and I can commit to the tools WG part as before. Everything > looks good. Thanks for making the changes, > > Martin > > > On Jan 8, 2011, at 12:36 AM, Bronis R. de Supinski wrote: > >> >> Jeff: >> >> OK, I was able to check out the golden copy, the >> working group stuff and the minutiae copy. I was >> also able to update the EI chapter of the minutiae >> copy so it looks like everything is good as far >> my stuff goes. Thanks for doing this, >> >> Bronis >> >> >> On Fri, 7 Jan 2011, Jeff Squyres wrote: >> >>> The permissions have been set. >>> >>> I made the executive decision to only allow writing in the MPI-3-related trees; it doesn't seem useful to be able to write into the MPI-1 and MPI-2-related trees anymore. >>> >>> Permissions are easy to enable/disable, so if we really need to write into the MPI-1/2 areas again, it's easy to fix. But for the moment, it seems like a good idea to have technology enforcing the protection of these directories -- to prevent "oops!" kinds of moments. >>> >>> >>> >>> On Jan 7, 2011, at 5:39 PM, Jeff Squyres wrote: >>> >>>> Most SVN changes are complete; lock released. >>>> >>>> Still to do: >>>> >>>> 1. set permissions properly (I have to run out right now; I'll do them later tonight, but they're complicated so it may take a few tries to get right -- bear with me if you try to commit and get a permission denied. Send me an email and I'll fix it) >>>> >>>> 2. Try to re-create the latex sources for MPI 1.0, 1.1, 1.3, 2.0, 2.1. Although I'm debating as to whether this is worth it... >>>> >>>> Please let me know if you run into any problems. Thanks! >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Jeff Squyres >>>> jsquyres(a)cisco.com >>>> For corporate legal information go to: >>>> http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/ >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Jeff Squyres >>> jsquyres(a)cisco.com >>> For corporate legal information go to: >>> http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/ >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> mpi-forum mailing list >>> mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >>> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> mpi-forum mailing list >> mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum > > ________________________________________________________________________ > Martin Schulz, schulzm(a)llnl.gov, http://people.llnl.gov/schulzm > CASC @ Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, USA > > > > > _______________________________________________ > mpi-forum mailing list > mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum

1 0

Re: [Mpi-forum] MPI_SVN_UNLOCK()
by William Gropp 08 Jan '11

08 Jan '11

I have all of the original MPI 1.0, 1.1, and 2.0 sources, though I don't think its worth working on it. The greatest problem is that, to exactly reproduce the older documents, we need to resurrect an old version of LaTeX :( Bill On Jan 7, 2011, at 4:39 PM, Jeff Squyres wrote: > Most SVN changes are complete; lock released. > > Still to do: > > 1. set permissions properly (I have to run out right now; I'll do > them later tonight, but they're complicated so it may take a few > tries to get right -- bear with me if you try to commit and get a > permission denied. Send me an email and I'll fix it) > > 2. Try to re-create the latex sources for MPI 1.0, 1.1, 1.3, 2.0, > 2.1. Although I'm debating as to whether this is worth it... > > Please let me know if you run into any problems. Thanks! > > -- > Jeff Squyres > jsquyres(a)cisco.com > For corporate legal information go to: > http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/ > > > _______________________________________________ > mpi-forum mailing list > mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum 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-forum] MPI_SVN_UNLOCK()
by Martin Schulz 08 Jan '11

08 Jan '11

Hi Jeff, Just to confirm as well - I can check out the new structure and I can commit to the tools WG part as before. Everything looks good. Thanks for making the changes, Martin On Jan 8, 2011, at 12:36 AM, Bronis R. de Supinski wrote: > > Jeff: > > OK, I was able to check out the golden copy, the > working group stuff and the minutiae copy. I was > also able to update the EI chapter of the minutiae > copy so it looks like everything is good as far > my stuff goes. Thanks for doing this, > > Bronis > > > On Fri, 7 Jan 2011, Jeff Squyres wrote: > >> The permissions have been set. >> >> I made the executive decision to only allow writing in the MPI-3-related trees; it doesn't seem useful to be able to write into the MPI-1 and MPI-2-related trees anymore. >> >> Permissions are easy to enable/disable, so if we really need to write into the MPI-1/2 areas again, it's easy to fix. But for the moment, it seems like a good idea to have technology enforcing the protection of these directories -- to prevent "oops!" kinds of moments. >> >> >> >> On Jan 7, 2011, at 5:39 PM, Jeff Squyres wrote: >> >>> Most SVN changes are complete; lock released. >>> >>> Still to do: >>> >>> 1. set permissions properly (I have to run out right now; I'll do them later tonight, but they're complicated so it may take a few tries to get right -- bear with me if you try to commit and get a permission denied. Send me an email and I'll fix it) >>> >>> 2. Try to re-create the latex sources for MPI 1.0, 1.1, 1.3, 2.0, 2.1. Although I'm debating as to whether this is worth it... >>> >>> Please let me know if you run into any problems. Thanks! >>> >>> -- >>> Jeff Squyres >>> jsquyres(a)cisco.com >>> For corporate legal information go to: >>> http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/ >>> >> >> >> -- >> Jeff Squyres >> jsquyres(a)cisco.com >> For corporate legal information go to: >> http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/ >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> mpi-forum mailing list >> mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum >> > _______________________________________________ > mpi-forum mailing list > mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum ________________________________________________________________________ Martin Schulz, schulzm(a)llnl.gov, http://people.llnl.gov/schulzm CASC @ Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, USA

1 0

Re: [Mpi-forum] MPI_SVN_UNLOCK()
by Bronis R. de Supinski 08 Jan '11

08 Jan '11

Jeff: OK, I was able to check out the golden copy, the working group stuff and the minutiae copy. I was also able to update the EI chapter of the minutiae copy so it looks like everything is good as far my stuff goes. Thanks for doing this, Bronis On Fri, 7 Jan 2011, Jeff Squyres wrote: > The permissions have been set. > > I made the executive decision to only allow writing in the MPI-3-related trees; it doesn't seem useful to be able to write into the MPI-1 and MPI-2-related trees anymore. > > Permissions are easy to enable/disable, so if we really need to write into the MPI-1/2 areas again, it's easy to fix. But for the moment, it seems like a good idea to have technology enforcing the protection of these directories -- to prevent "oops!" kinds of moments. > > > > On Jan 7, 2011, at 5:39 PM, Jeff Squyres wrote: > >> Most SVN changes are complete; lock released. >> >> Still to do: >> >> 1. set permissions properly (I have to run out right now; I'll do them later tonight, but they're complicated so it may take a few tries to get right -- bear with me if you try to commit and get a permission denied. Send me an email and I'll fix it) >> >> 2. Try to re-create the latex sources for MPI 1.0, 1.1, 1.3, 2.0, 2.1. Although I'm debating as to whether this is worth it... >> >> Please let me know if you run into any problems. Thanks! >> >> -- >> Jeff Squyres >> jsquyres(a)cisco.com >> For corporate legal information go to: >> http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/ >> > > > -- > Jeff Squyres > jsquyres(a)cisco.com > For corporate legal information go to: > http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/ > > > _______________________________________________ > mpi-forum mailing list > mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum >

1 0

Re: [Mpi-forum] Minor EI Chapter Revision
by Bronis R. de Supinski 08 Jan '11

08 Jan '11

All: OK, I have made the correction that Bill noted. I have updated the copy on the twiki to the attached. Again, let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Bronis On Thu, 6 Jan 2011, Bronis R. de Supinski wrote: > > Bill: > > Re: >> This looks pretty good. One question: >> >> Page 12, line 44, should this be "the appropriate null pointers may be >> passed in their place" (plural pointers)? > > Yes, it should. Good catch. I will make the change later > today and send and post the revision. > > Bronis > > > >> Bill >> >> On Jan 6, 2011, at 8:59 AM, Bronis R. de Supinski wrote: >> >>> >>> All: >>> >>> The External Interfaces Chapter Committee (i.e., Pavan, >>> Doug and I) have gone over the existing text in the EI >>> chapter and suggest a few minor revisions that are >>> shown as ticket 0 changes in the attached. I have also >>> attached this to the Hybrid Working Group page on the Twiki: >>> >>> https://svn.mpi-forum.org/trac/mpi-forum-web/raw-attachment/wiki/MPI3Hybrid… >>> >>> I will present this version at the February meeting. We >>> would like to adopt it as the baseline for major proposals >>> that will come from the Hybrid Working Group. >>> >>> Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, >>> >>> Bronis >>> <ei-2.pdf><ATT00001..txt> >> >> 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-forum] MPI_SVN_UNLOCK()
by Jeff Squyres 07 Jan '11

07 Jan '11

The permissions have been set. I made the executive decision to only allow writing in the MPI-3-related trees; it doesn't seem useful to be able to write into the MPI-1 and MPI-2-related trees anymore. Permissions are easy to enable/disable, so if we really need to write into the MPI-1/2 areas again, it's easy to fix. But for the moment, it seems like a good idea to have technology enforcing the protection of these directories -- to prevent "oops!" kinds of moments. On Jan 7, 2011, at 5:39 PM, Jeff Squyres wrote: > Most SVN changes are complete; lock released. > > Still to do: > > 1. set permissions properly (I have to run out right now; I'll do them later tonight, but they're complicated so it may take a few tries to get right -- bear with me if you try to commit and get a permission denied. Send me an email and I'll fix it) > > 2. Try to re-create the latex sources for MPI 1.0, 1.1, 1.3, 2.0, 2.1. Although I'm debating as to whether this is worth it... > > Please let me know if you run into any problems. Thanks! > > -- > Jeff Squyres > jsquyres(a)cisco.com > For corporate legal information go to: > http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/ > -- Jeff Squyres jsquyres(a)cisco.com For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/

1 0

Re: [Mpi-forum] Which document to reference when creating new tickets?
by Bronis R. de Supinski 07 Jan '11

07 Jan '11

Fab: Re: >> I have to disagree. When I apply updates, I will apply >> them to the current version of the files. It makes much >> more sense to write tickets in terms of the most recent >> golden copy since that is what will be modified. > > Is the MPI 3.0 draft a golden copy, or merely silver since it's not complete? We have called it the golden copy. I have nothing invested in the term so if others want to change it... >> I do agree that existing tickets should be left as they >> stand. I also strongly agree that any ticket should >> clearly reference whatever version it is based on. > > I just want to make sure that I don't end up in some procedural BS due > to referencing the wrong document. I don't care much which document to > reference, and it seems to me to that we should: > > 1. Reference the latest draft when the ticket is created. > 2. Keep the draft reference constant for the life of the ticket. > > Does anyone object to these 'rules'? Your rules more succinctly state my position. Bronis > Thanks, > -Fab > >> Bronis >> >> >> On Fri, 7 Jan 2011, Rolf Rabenseifner wrote: >> >>> My opinion: >>> >>> As far as possible, references should be done based on the latest official >>> standard, i.e., currently MPI-2.2. >>> >>> Only in the case that one wants to modify modified or new text in >>> MPI-3.0 draft 1, one should make references related to this draft. >>> >>> Best practice is, to always mention the base, e.g., >>> >>> MPI-2.2, page 45 line 3-7 reads >>> .... >>> but should read >>> >>> .... >>> Most opened tickets are besed on MPI-2.2 and should not be modified >>> because this would only enlarge the risk that incorrect page or >>> line numbers are used. >>> >>> Rolf >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> From: "Fab Tillier" <ftillier(a)microsoft.com> To: >>>> mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org Sent: Friday, January 7, 2011 7:40:48 PM >>>> Subject: [Mpi-forum] Which document to reference when creating new >>>> tickets? Hi Folks, >>>> >>>> Now that we have a 3.0 draft posted publicly, which document should be >>>> referenced when creating tickets? Should tickets still reference page >>>> and line numbers from the 2.2 standard, or should they instead >>>> reference the 3.0 draft 1 document? >>>> >>>> As we create new drafts, will in-progress tickets need to be updated >>>> to reference the latest released draft? >>>> >>>> Lastly, I think it would be much nicer to have the 3.0 draft available >>>> from the MPI Documents section of the website, rather than under the >>>> meetings information section (which incidentally includes "for 2010" >>>> in the link on the main forum page.) >>>> >>>> -Fab >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> mpi-forum mailing list >>>> mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >>>> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum >>> >>> -- >>> Dr. Rolf Rabenseifner . . . . . . . . . .. email rabenseifner(a)hlrs.de >>> High Performance Computing Center (HLRS) . phone ++49(0)711/685-65530 >>> University of Stuttgart . . . . . . . . .. fax ++49(0)711 / 685-65832 >>> Head of Dpmt Parallel Computing . . . www.hlrs.de/people/rabenseifner >>> Nobelstr. 19, D-70550 Stuttgart, Germany . (Office: Allmandring 30) >>> _______________________________________________ >>> mpi-forum mailing list >>> mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >>> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> mpi-forum mailing list >> mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum >

1 0