February 2012 - mpi-forum - mailman3.cels.anl.gov

Re: [Mpi-forum] MPI-2.2 errata tickets - may be urgent
by Rolf Rabenseifner 18 Feb '12

18 Feb '12

Yes, we need to do the changes for 3.0. I'll add the Errata-Mark in the ticket that we can put it also into the errata pdf for 2.2. We should keep the trivial things outside the errata list, i.e., to change them all into MPI-3.0 tickets. Ticket 321 may be also added into the errata list because we never want to see an 2.2-compliant library handling MPI_Wait for I/O-requests wrong. We should not spend time to an 2.2-errata discussion, but we should formally read the necessary (and very small) tickets in Chicago. Rolf ----- Original Message ----- > From: "William Gropp" <wgropp(a)illinois.edu> > To: "Main MPI Forum mailing list" <mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org> > Sent: Saturday, February 18, 2012 1:17:16 AM > Subject: Re: [Mpi-forum] MPI-2.2 errata tickets - may be urgent > I agree with Dave on these, particularly the trivial text changes. > > The way that these were handled for MPI 2.0 errata was by providing a > web page and forum for discussion, followed by creating a detailed > document with the changes (which we already have for previous 2.2 > errata), which was then voted on, as a group and once, through an > email vote of the Forum (this preceded the current sequence of > meetings). For anything that is an errata item, this process has > worked well. > > I think it is too late to make the change in 196 for MPI 2.2, but it > should be considered for 3.0 (by the chapter committee). > > Bill > > On Feb 17, 2012, at 12:59 PM, Dave Goodell wrote: > > > ==Executive summary== > > > > Only #196 and #198 might possibly need to be discussed by and voted > > upon by the whole Forum. However, neither is an especially pressing > > or interesting issue. All of the rest of the tickets just require > > that the chapter authors are diligent and correct all of the small > > issues contained in these tickets for their respective chapters. > > > > > > ==Detailed review== > > > > #166, #170, #172, #177, #179, #181, #183, #186, #191, #197, #200, > > #201, and #202 are all trivial text changes that should be absorbed > > by the appropriate chapter committees. ***We must not waste our time > > reading these and voting on them in the whole Forum*** > > > > As long as C++ is deprecated then we should avoid taking any action > > on #59, #190, or #192. However #190 and #192 are trivial if the > > relevant chapter committees want to fix them. > > > > #199 is a very small (sort of) problem w.r.t. our inconsistent > > IN/OUT/INOUT usage. I'm inclined to say that we should leave this up > > to the chapter committee as well. Fab could do us all a favor by > > withdrawing it again. > > > > #176, #178, and #261 aren't trivial, but they can easily be handled > > by a short discussion within the relevant chapter committees. > > > > I've withdrawn #193 as a duplicate of #201. > > > > #196 might warrant some discussion, although I personally think that > > the issue is pointless. > > > > #198 is something that needs to be handled by chapter > > authors/committees, although the correct action to take would need > > to be decided by a beauty contest at the forum level. My personal > > view is that this ticket is a waste of time. > > > > -Dave > > > > On Feb 17, 2012, at 11:33 AM CST, Rolf Rabenseifner wrote: > > > >> Rich and all Forum members, > >> > >> it looks like that the whole Forum forgot that there are also > >> MPI-2.2 errata tickets: > >> > >> https://svn.mpi-forum.org/trac/mpi-forum-web/query?status=accepted&status=a… > >> > >> 1 is passed > >> 6 are waiting for reviews > >> 17 seems to need some work > >> > >> Who may volonteer to look at these 23 issues = bugs in the current > >> MPI-2.2 > >> > >> As long as they are all ticket 0 they can be done in Japan. > >> > >> 5 tickets are "correction to the standard" and usually need > >> 1 reading + 2 vote meetings. > >> This means that some of these tickets are urgent in the sense > >> that they should be scheduled and read in the March meeting. > >> > >> The forum should be responsible to remove known bugs. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > mpi-forum mailing list > > mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum > > William Gropp > Director, Parallel Computing Institute > 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 -- 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)

1 0

Re: [Mpi-forum] MPI-2.2 errata tickets - may be urgent
by William Gropp 17 Feb '12

17 Feb '12

I agree with Dave on these, particularly the trivial text changes. The way that these were handled for MPI 2.0 errata was by providing a web page and forum for discussion, followed by creating a detailed document with the changes (which we already have for previous 2.2 errata), which was then voted on, as a group and once, through an email vote of the Forum (this preceded the current sequence of meetings). For anything that is an errata item, this process has worked well. I think it is too late to make the change in 196 for MPI 2.2, but it should be considered for 3.0 (by the chapter committee). Bill On Feb 17, 2012, at 12:59 PM, Dave Goodell wrote: > ==Executive summary== > > Only #196 and #198 might possibly need to be discussed by and voted upon by the whole Forum. However, neither is an especially pressing or interesting issue. All of the rest of the tickets just require that the chapter authors are diligent and correct all of the small issues contained in these tickets for their respective chapters. > > > ==Detailed review== > > #166, #170, #172, #177, #179, #181, #183, #186, #191, #197, #200, #201, and #202 are all trivial text changes that should be absorbed by the appropriate chapter committees. ***We must not waste our time reading these and voting on them in the whole Forum*** > > As long as C++ is deprecated then we should avoid taking any action on #59, #190, or #192. However #190 and #192 are trivial if the relevant chapter committees want to fix them. > > #199 is a very small (sort of) problem w.r.t. our inconsistent IN/OUT/INOUT usage. I'm inclined to say that we should leave this up to the chapter committee as well. Fab could do us all a favor by withdrawing it again. > > #176, #178, and #261 aren't trivial, but they can easily be handled by a short discussion within the relevant chapter committees. > > I've withdrawn #193 as a duplicate of #201. > > #196 might warrant some discussion, although I personally think that the issue is pointless. > > #198 is something that needs to be handled by chapter authors/committees, although the correct action to take would need to be decided by a beauty contest at the forum level. My personal view is that this ticket is a waste of time. > > -Dave > > On Feb 17, 2012, at 11:33 AM CST, Rolf Rabenseifner wrote: > >> Rich and all Forum members, >> >> it looks like that the whole Forum forgot that there are also >> MPI-2.2 errata tickets: >> >> https://svn.mpi-forum.org/trac/mpi-forum-web/query?status=accepted&status=a… >> >> 1 is passed >> 6 are waiting for reviews >> 17 seems to need some work >> >> Who may volonteer to look at these 23 issues = bugs in the current MPI-2.2 >> >> As long as they are all ticket 0 they can be done in Japan. >> >> 5 tickets are "correction to the standard" and usually need >> 1 reading + 2 vote meetings. >> This means that some of these tickets are urgent in the sense >> that they should be scheduled and read in the March meeting. >> >> The forum should be responsible to remove known bugs. > > > _______________________________________________ > mpi-forum mailing list > mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum William Gropp Director, Parallel Computing Institute 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-2.2 errata tickets - may be urgent
by Fab Tillier 17 Feb '12

17 Feb '12

Dave Goodell wrote on Fri, 17 Feb 2012 at 10:59:30 <snip...> > #199 is a very small (sort of) problem w.r.t. our inconsistent IN/OUT/INOUT > usage. I'm inclined to say that we should leave this up to the chapter > committee as well. Fab could do us all a favor by withdrawing it again. Already withdrawn, because the IN/OUT/INOUT annotations aren't strictly for that function's parameter use (see MPI_Irecv, for example - the buffer pointer is not really OUT for that function). Also, #197 is already fixed in the 3.0 standard, so I closed that one too. > #198 is something that needs to be handled by chapter > authors/committees, although the correct action to take would need to be > decided by a beauty contest at the forum level. My personal view is > that this ticket is a waste of time. You're probably right, and tickets 125/126 end up touching a lot of the pointers anyway... The placement of the * is most certainly a ticket-0 change, if not less than 0 - it's a whitespace change. I might tackle it when I'm looking for mindless distractions, I just need to know which way to go. From looking at the standard document, it seems the only inconsistency relates to void* parameters. Should be easy enough to fix, and probably makes sense to change to "void *" to match other pointer parameters. -Fab

1 0

Re: [Mpi-forum] MPI-2.2 errata tickets - may be urgent
by Dave Goodell 17 Feb '12

17 Feb '12

==Executive summary== Only #196 and #198 might possibly need to be discussed by and voted upon by the whole Forum. However, neither is an especially pressing or interesting issue. All of the rest of the tickets just require that the chapter authors are diligent and correct all of the small issues contained in these tickets for their respective chapters. ==Detailed review== #166, #170, #172, #177, #179, #181, #183, #186, #191, #197, #200, #201, and #202 are all trivial text changes that should be absorbed by the appropriate chapter committees. ***We must not waste our time reading these and voting on them in the whole Forum*** As long as C++ is deprecated then we should avoid taking any action on #59, #190, or #192. However #190 and #192 are trivial if the relevant chapter committees want to fix them. #199 is a very small (sort of) problem w.r.t. our inconsistent IN/OUT/INOUT usage. I'm inclined to say that we should leave this up to the chapter committee as well. Fab could do us all a favor by withdrawing it again. #176, #178, and #261 aren't trivial, but they can easily be handled by a short discussion within the relevant chapter committees. I've withdrawn #193 as a duplicate of #201. #196 might warrant some discussion, although I personally think that the issue is pointless. #198 is something that needs to be handled by chapter authors/committees, although the correct action to take would need to be decided by a beauty contest at the forum level. My personal view is that this ticket is a waste of time. -Dave On Feb 17, 2012, at 11:33 AM CST, Rolf Rabenseifner wrote: > Rich and all Forum members, > > it looks like that the whole Forum forgot that there are also > MPI-2.2 errata tickets: > > https://svn.mpi-forum.org/trac/mpi-forum-web/query?status=accepted&status=a… > > 1 is passed > 6 are waiting for reviews > 17 seems to need some work > > Who may volonteer to look at these 23 issues = bugs in the current MPI-2.2 > > As long as they are all ticket 0 they can be done in Japan. > > 5 tickets are "correction to the standard" and usually need > 1 reading + 2 vote meetings. > This means that some of these tickets are urgent in the sense > that they should be scheduled and read in the March meeting. > > The forum should be responsible to remove known bugs.

1 0

MPI-2.2 errata tickets - may be urgent
by Rolf Rabenseifner 17 Feb '12

17 Feb '12

Rich and all Forum members, it looks like that the whole Forum forgot that there are also MPI-2.2 errata tickets: https://svn.mpi-forum.org/trac/mpi-forum-web/query?status=accepted&status=a… 1 is passed 6 are waiting for reviews 17 seems to need some work Who may volonteer to look at these 23 issues = bugs in the current MPI-2.2 As long as they are all ticket 0 they can be done in Japan. 5 tickets are "correction to the standard" and usually need 1 reading + 2 vote meetings. This means that some of these tickets are urgent in the sense that they should be scheduled and read in the March meeting. The forum should be responsible to remove known bugs. Best regards Rolf -- 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)

1 0

Agenda corrections needed - Re: March MPI Forum meeting
by Rolf Rabenseifner 17 Feb '12

17 Feb '12

Rich, Please also put into the #321 into the ticket-0 session. With this, I've now five small corrections: - Please can you move existing #294 -- from voting block Tuesday 10:30-11:30am -- to reading block Tuesday 12:30-4:30pm - At last meeting we tried to find people who proceed with tickets with authors not coming to the meeting. We put me on the list for #158 and #187, i.e. in the agenda: -- Traeff/Rabenseifner #158 -- Ritzdorf/rabenseifner #187 - On Monday, Jeff and the forum should be prepared for a short formal vote for all ticket 0, therefore please subsitute Tuesday 8:45-9:30am: "Existing ticket 0 -" by "Existing ticket 0 (reading and vote) -" - Please put also #321 MPI_WAIT/TEST language unclear about non blocking I/O, Generalized, or collective requests. into the ticket-0 list. - Please add (e.g. at the end of the agenda): "If there is time, formal reading of tickets - Use of [] in output arrays ticket #125 - Consistent use of [] for input arrays ticket #126 - "same arguments" to MPI_Reduce ticket #218 " Best regards Rolf ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Rolf Rabenseifner" <rabenseifner(a)hlrs.de> > To: "Main MPI Forum mailing list" <mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org> > Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 5:05:59 PM > Subject: Re: [Mpi-forum] March MPI Forum meeting > Rich, > > thanks. > > I've still four small corrections: > > - Please can you move existing #294 > -- from voting block Tuesday 10:30-11:30am > -- to reading block Tuesday 12:30-4:30pm > > - At last meeting we tried to find people who proceed with tickets > with authors not coming to the meeting. > We put me on the list for #158 and #187, i.e. in the agenda: > -- Traeff/Rabenseifner #158 > -- Ritzdorf/rabenseifner #187 > > - On Monday, Jeff and the forum should be prepared for a short > formal vote for all ticket 0, therefore please subsitute > Tuesday 8:45-9:30am: > "Existing ticket 0 -" > by > "Existing ticket 0 (reading and vote) -" > > - Please add (e.g. at the end of the agenda): > > "If there is time, formal reading of tickets > - Use of [] in output arrays ticket #125 > - Consistent use of [] for input arrays ticket #126 > - "same arguments" to MPI_Reduce ticket #218 " > > Best regards > Rolf > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Richard L. Graham" <rlgraham(a)ornl.gov> > > To: "Main MPI Forum mailing list" <mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org> > > Sent: Sunday, February 12, 2012 7:49:26 PM > > Subject: Re: [Mpi-forum] March MPI Forum meeting > > Thanks Rolf, > > I updated most of the requests, but did not move things around like > > you asked. > > Also, ticket 264 is being delayed by one meeting. > > > > All - please check and make sure that I am not missing something > > else. > > > > Thanks again, > > Rich > > > > On Jan 31, 2012, at 6:08 PM, Rolf Rabenseifner wrote: > > > > > Hi Rich, > > > > > > please can you do a few changes/corrections... to the agenda: > > > (Nothing spectacular - only small but needed things) > > > > > > - Monday 1:00pm - 6:00pm Plenary Session: Fault Tolerance working > > > group - Formal reading - Ticket #276 > > > > > > you should add #291 (it is related to FT an otherwise it will > > > have no chance because it is not announced for formal reading) > > > > > > - At the end of Monday, please add > > > > > > At any free time Plenary Session: Formal reading > > > Use of [] in output arrays ticket #125 > > > Consistent use of [] for input arrays ticket > > > #126 > > > "same arguments" to MPI_Reduce ticket #218 > > > > > > - Tuesday 9:00-9:30am: please extend to 45 minutes (I add 3 > > > further > > > tickets) > > > and add the following ticket numbers: > > > #185 #207 #215 #254 #255 #262 #263 #267 #268 #312 (from Rolf's > > > slide 9) > > > #162 #182 #219 (from Rolf's slide 11) > > > > > > - Tuesday 9:30-10:00am moves to 9:45-10:15 > > > - Tuesday 10-10:15 is a 1st (!) vote and should go to the votes > > > session > > > after the break. It is a trivial correction to NBC and will not > > > have > > > any discussion. > > > > > > - Tuesday 10:20-11:30am Votes session > > > 2nd (!! not 1st) votes are #299 and #229 > > > In continues with 1st votes: > > > - starting with #272 (moved from 10:00 slot) > > > - and adding at the end: > > > MPI_Icomm_dup ticket #168 > > > Please move #294 (Goodell/Rabenseifner) at the end of > > > 12:30-4:30pm > > > slot. > > > Please add the following additional vote: > > > "One Single vote together *) for tickets > > > #185 #207 #215 #254 #255 #262 #263 #267 #268 #312 #162 #182 #219 > > > *) If somebody complains now or in the meeting, then single > > > voting > > > can be done for specific tickets or voting can be done on the > > > next > > > day." > > > > > > - Tuesday 12:30-4:30pm: > > > - Please add after #305 a new ticket-line > > > Scalable irregular collectives (Hoefler) ticket #264 > > > - and at the end #294 from above: > > > MPI_UNWEIGHTED should not be NULL (Goodell/Rabenseifner) > > > ticket > > > #294 > > > > > > - Tuesday 4:45-6:30pm: > > > - 158: (Traeff/Rabenseifner) > > > - 187: (Ritzdorf/Rabenseifner) > > > > > > - Tuesday 7-9pm: > > > - MPI_IN_PLACE in Gather (Hoefler) ticket #159 > > > has wrong ticket number: it is #163 > > > > > > I also updated my slides based on your agenda (together with these > > > changes). > > > It is attached. > > > > > > Best regards > > > Rolf > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > >> From: "Richard L. Graham" <rlgraham(a)ornl.gov> > > >> To: "Main MPI Forum mailing list" <mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org> > > >> Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 2:35:57 AM > > >> Subject: [Mpi-forum] March MPI Forum meeting > > >> Registration is up for the meeting, as is the agenda. Please > > >> check > > >> out > > >> the agenda - Rolf has done a lot of work to figure out the open > > >> 3.0 > > >> tickets. For those that have already passe a reading, there is no > > >> issue - voting will progress. On the other ones, I listed the > > >> ticket > > >> owner for all of these, to make sure that folks are aware that > > >> their > > >> tickets are up for discussion. If folks do not want to proceed > > >> with > > >> these, please let me know. Those that are on the hook are Koziel, > > >> Gropp, Hoefler, Dinan, Tillier, Snir, Squyres, and Moody - please > > >> confirm that you are OK with these tickets. Also, Traff and > > >> Ritzdorf > > >> are owners of two tickets, so someone else will need to move > > >> these > > >> along. > > >> > > >> Rich > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> 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_Overview_MPI-3.0_Mar2012_action-items.ppt>_______________________________________________ > > > 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 > > -- > 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) -- 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)

1 0

Re: [Mpi-forum] March MPI Forum meeting
by Rolf Rabenseifner 16 Feb '12

16 Feb '12

Rich, thanks. I've still four small corrections: - Please can you move existing #294 -- from voting block Tuesday 10:30-11:30am -- to reading block Tuesday 12:30-4:30pm - At last meeting we tried to find people who proceed with tickets with authors not coming to the meeting. We put me on the list for #158 and #187, i.e. in the agenda: -- Traeff/Rabenseifner #158 -- Ritzdorf/rabenseifner #187 - On Monday, Jeff and the forum should be prepared for a short formal vote for all ticket 0, therefore please subsitute Tuesday 8:45-9:30am: "Existing ticket 0 -" by "Existing ticket 0 (reading and vote) -" - Please add (e.g. at the end of the agenda): "If there is time, formal reading of tickets - Use of [] in output arrays ticket #125 - Consistent use of [] for input arrays ticket #126 - "same arguments" to MPI_Reduce ticket #218 " Best regards Rolf ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Richard L. Graham" <rlgraham(a)ornl.gov> > To: "Main MPI Forum mailing list" <mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org> > Sent: Sunday, February 12, 2012 7:49:26 PM > Subject: Re: [Mpi-forum] March MPI Forum meeting > Thanks Rolf, > I updated most of the requests, but did not move things around like > you asked. > Also, ticket 264 is being delayed by one meeting. > > All - please check and make sure that I am not missing something else. > > Thanks again, > Rich > > On Jan 31, 2012, at 6:08 PM, Rolf Rabenseifner wrote: > > > Hi Rich, > > > > please can you do a few changes/corrections... to the agenda: > > (Nothing spectacular - only small but needed things) > > > > - Monday 1:00pm - 6:00pm Plenary Session: Fault Tolerance working > > group - Formal reading - Ticket #276 > > > > you should add #291 (it is related to FT an otherwise it will > > have no chance because it is not announced for formal reading) > > > > - At the end of Monday, please add > > > > At any free time Plenary Session: Formal reading > > Use of [] in output arrays ticket #125 > > Consistent use of [] for input arrays ticket > > #126 > > "same arguments" to MPI_Reduce ticket #218 > > > > - Tuesday 9:00-9:30am: please extend to 45 minutes (I add 3 further > > tickets) > > and add the following ticket numbers: > > #185 #207 #215 #254 #255 #262 #263 #267 #268 #312 (from Rolf's > > slide 9) > > #162 #182 #219 (from Rolf's slide 11) > > > > - Tuesday 9:30-10:00am moves to 9:45-10:15 > > - Tuesday 10-10:15 is a 1st (!) vote and should go to the votes > > session > > after the break. It is a trivial correction to NBC and will not > > have > > any discussion. > > > > - Tuesday 10:20-11:30am Votes session > > 2nd (!! not 1st) votes are #299 and #229 > > In continues with 1st votes: > > - starting with #272 (moved from 10:00 slot) > > - and adding at the end: > > MPI_Icomm_dup ticket #168 > > Please move #294 (Goodell/Rabenseifner) at the end of 12:30-4:30pm > > slot. > > Please add the following additional vote: > > "One Single vote together *) for tickets > > #185 #207 #215 #254 #255 #262 #263 #267 #268 #312 #162 #182 #219 > > *) If somebody complains now or in the meeting, then single voting > > can be done for specific tickets or voting can be done on the next > > day." > > > > - Tuesday 12:30-4:30pm: > > - Please add after #305 a new ticket-line > > Scalable irregular collectives (Hoefler) ticket #264 > > - and at the end #294 from above: > > MPI_UNWEIGHTED should not be NULL (Goodell/Rabenseifner) ticket > > #294 > > > > - Tuesday 4:45-6:30pm: > > - 158: (Traeff/Rabenseifner) > > - 187: (Ritzdorf/Rabenseifner) > > > > - Tuesday 7-9pm: > > - MPI_IN_PLACE in Gather (Hoefler) ticket #159 > > has wrong ticket number: it is #163 > > > > I also updated my slides based on your agenda (together with these > > changes). > > It is attached. > > > > Best regards > > Rolf > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: "Richard L. Graham" <rlgraham(a)ornl.gov> > >> To: "Main MPI Forum mailing list" <mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org> > >> Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 2:35:57 AM > >> Subject: [Mpi-forum] March MPI Forum meeting > >> Registration is up for the meeting, as is the agenda. Please check > >> out > >> the agenda - Rolf has done a lot of work to figure out the open 3.0 > >> tickets. For those that have already passe a reading, there is no > >> issue - voting will progress. On the other ones, I listed the > >> ticket > >> owner for all of these, to make sure that folks are aware that > >> their > >> tickets are up for discussion. If folks do not want to proceed with > >> these, please let me know. Those that are on the hook are Koziel, > >> Gropp, Hoefler, Dinan, Tillier, Snir, Squyres, and Moody - please > >> confirm that you are OK with these tickets. Also, Traff and > >> Ritzdorf > >> are owners of two tickets, so someone else will need to move these > >> along. > >> > >> Rich > >> _______________________________________________ > >> 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_Overview_MPI-3.0_Mar2012_action-items.ppt>_______________________________________________ > > 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 -- 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)

1 0

Re: [Mpi-forum] MPI_WAIT/MPI_TEST and generalized, I/O, and NBC requests
by William Gropp 14 Feb '12

14 Feb '12

Pavan et al, We did talk about this at a previous Forum meeting. While there was general agreement that we should make use of chapter committees as a more time efficient as well as accurate and reliable approach, what still needs to be done is to revise the rules of engagement and put them up for discussion and formal votes. Torsten and I were drafting a document based on the discussions; I'm behind in finishing it. Bill On Feb 14, 2012, at 2:03 PM, Pavan Balaji wrote: > > Can someone clarify what pieces are deemed "chapter committee changes" vs. something that requires voting? My understanding was that grammatical errors that do not change the meaning are the chapter committee's job. While this particular change is trivially obvious, that doesn't fall into the above set of allowed chapter committee changes. > > In any case, making a decision over email seems ridiculous. There needs to be an official rule for this. I'm OK with the official rule being "the chapter committee decides on whether a change requires a forum vote or not". But collecting preferences over email is a nonsensical way to do this. > > -- Pavan > > On 02/14/2012 01:51 PM, Graham, Richard L. wrote: >> Chapter committee should be fine - we don't need a change-log for NBC (it is not in a release version of the standard, so no change to log), but have not yet looked at the other two areas. >> >> Rich >> >> On Feb 14, 2012, at 9:43 PM, Torsten Hoefler wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 07:10:42PM +0000, Fab Tillier wrote: >>>> I made a ticket for this, 321, so I could track it and have a way of >>>> posting a PDF for folks to take a look (e.g. I'd like the chapter >>>> authors for NBC, I/O, and generalized requests to agree to the >>>> wording). Beyond that, I don't care how this eventually gets checked >>>> into the approved branch, and am happy just merging it and marking it >>>> as ticket0 and omitting the changelog entry if that's what folks want. >>>> >>>> So far we have: >>>> >>>> In favor of full ticket: >>>> - Rolf >>>> >>>> In favor of chapter committee: >>>> - Bill >>>> - Dave >>>> - Bronis >>>> >>>> I'd like to see at least Rich (pt2pt), Torsten (coll), and Rajeev >>>> (I/O) chime in with their preference. >>> I already indicated my preference a week ago. I was against a ticket and >>> pro chapter committee. We should lump this into the bulk ticket-0 >>> tickets we have lying around. >>> >>> Torsten >>> >>> -- >>> bash$ :(){ :|:&};: --------------------- http://www.unixer.de/ ----- >>> Torsten Hoefler | Performance Modeling and Simulation Lead >>> Blue Waters Directorate | University of Illinois (UIUC) >>> 1205 W Clark Street | Urbana, IL, 61801 >>> NCSA Building | +01 (217) 244-7736 >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 > > -- > Pavan Balaji > http://www.mcs.anl.gov/~balaji > _______________________________________________ > mpi-forum mailing list > mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum William Gropp Director, Parallel Computing Institute 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_WAIT/MPI_TEST and generalized, I/O, and NBC requests
by Fab Tillier 14 Feb '12

14 Feb '12

Rich, It might be worthwhile to allocate some time for ticket 321 in the agenda - not so much to review the ticket, but to review, clarify, and document the process around this kinds of change. I believe Rolf suggested a ticket because, like Pavan noted, this is not a case of a 'ticket 0' type change, so should follow our standard process. However, it is also trivially obvious and the original intent of the text, so I can also see the other side of the argument that we shouldn't waste time at the Forum to review it. -Fab Pavan Balaji wrote on Tue, 14 Feb 2012 at 12:03:40 > > Can someone clarify what pieces are deemed "chapter committee changes" > vs. something that requires voting? My understanding was that > grammatical errors that do not change the meaning are the chapter > committee's job. While this particular change is trivially obvious, > that doesn't fall into the above set of allowed chapter committee changes. > > In any case, making a decision over email seems ridiculous. There needs > to be an official rule for this. I'm OK with the official rule being > "the chapter committee decides on whether a change requires a forum vote > or not". But collecting preferences over email is a nonsensical way to > do this. > > -- Pavan > On 02/14/2012 01:51 PM, Graham, Richard L. wrote: >> Chapter committee should be fine - we don't need a change-log for NBC (it >> is not in a release version of the standard, so no change to log), but have not >> yet looked at the other two areas. >> >> Rich >> >> On Feb 14, 2012, at 9:43 PM, Torsten Hoefler wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 07:10:42PM +0000, Fab Tillier wrote: >>>> I made a ticket for this, 321, so I could track it and have a way of >>>> posting a PDF for folks to take a look (e.g. I'd like the chapter >>>> authors for NBC, I/O, and generalized requests to agree to the >>>> wording). Beyond that, I don't care how this eventually gets checked >>>> into the approved branch, and am happy just merging it and marking it >>>> as ticket0 and omitting the changelog entry if that's what folks want. >>>> >>>> So far we have: >>>> >>>> In favor of full ticket: >>>> - Rolf >>>> >>>> In favor of chapter committee: >>>> - Bill >>>> - Dave >>>> - Bronis >>>> >>>> I'd like to see at least Rich (pt2pt), Torsten (coll), and Rajeev >>>> (I/O) chime in with their preference. >>> I already indicated my preference a week ago. I was against a ticket and >>> pro chapter committee. We should lump this into the bulk ticket-0 >>> tickets we have lying around. >>> >>> Torsten >>> >>> -- >>> bash$ :(){ :|:&};: --------------------- http://www.unixer.de/ ----- >>> Torsten Hoefler | Performance Modeling and Simulation Lead >>> Blue Waters Directorate | University of Illinois (UIUC) >>> 1205 W Clark Street | Urbana, IL, 61801 >>> NCSA Building | +01 (217) 244-7736 >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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] MPI_WAIT/MPI_TEST and generalized, I/O, and NBC requests
by Pavan Balaji 14 Feb '12

14 Feb '12

Can someone clarify what pieces are deemed "chapter committee changes" vs. something that requires voting? My understanding was that grammatical errors that do not change the meaning are the chapter committee's job. While this particular change is trivially obvious, that doesn't fall into the above set of allowed chapter committee changes. In any case, making a decision over email seems ridiculous. There needs to be an official rule for this. I'm OK with the official rule being "the chapter committee decides on whether a change requires a forum vote or not". But collecting preferences over email is a nonsensical way to do this. -- Pavan On 02/14/2012 01:51 PM, Graham, Richard L. wrote: > Chapter committee should be fine - we don't need a change-log for NBC (it is not in a release version of the standard, so no change to log), but have not yet looked at the other two areas. > > Rich > > On Feb 14, 2012, at 9:43 PM, Torsten Hoefler wrote: > >> On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 07:10:42PM +0000, Fab Tillier wrote: >>> I made a ticket for this, 321, so I could track it and have a way of >>> posting a PDF for folks to take a look (e.g. I'd like the chapter >>> authors for NBC, I/O, and generalized requests to agree to the >>> wording). Beyond that, I don't care how this eventually gets checked >>> into the approved branch, and am happy just merging it and marking it >>> as ticket0 and omitting the changelog entry if that's what folks want. >>> >>> So far we have: >>> >>> In favor of full ticket: >>> - Rolf >>> >>> In favor of chapter committee: >>> - Bill >>> - Dave >>> - Bronis >>> >>> I'd like to see at least Rich (pt2pt), Torsten (coll), and Rajeev >>> (I/O) chime in with their preference. >> I already indicated my preference a week ago. I was against a ticket and >> pro chapter committee. We should lump this into the bulk ticket-0 >> tickets we have lying around. >> >> Torsten >> >> -- >> bash$ :(){ :|:&};: --------------------- http://www.unixer.de/ ----- >> Torsten Hoefler | Performance Modeling and Simulation Lead >> Blue Waters Directorate | University of Illinois (UIUC) >> 1205 W Clark Street | Urbana, IL, 61801 >> NCSA Building | +01 (217) 244-7736 >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 -- Pavan Balaji http://www.mcs.anl.gov/~balaji

1 0