May 2013 - mpi-forum - mailman3.cels.anl.gov

June 2013 Meeting Agenda and Final Logistics
by Schulz, Martin 28 May '13

28 May '13

Hi all, Over the weekend, I updated the agenda for the meeting next week based on the feedback that I have received. This should be final now - we'll end on Friday at noon, i.e., right before lunch. Please let me know if you spot any mistakes. For all WG chairs: note that I have again added a short slot for updates from the WGs to the forum. Please come prepared to give the rest of us not in the respective WG a short update about current issues that WG works on and their progress (nothing too formal, just a few minutes or AT MOST 1-2 slides - no slides are fine as well). If you won't be in San Jose, it would be great if you could appoint a designee. Thanks! Two logistics items: - If you have any food restrictions and have not sent Rich email, please do so ASAP. - If you would like to participate remotely in any of the sessions, please let Jeff and myself (as well as the respective WG chair) know and we'll setup a Webex connection. Thanks and see you next week! Martin ________________________________________________________________________ Martin Schulz, schulzm(a)llnl.gov, http://people.llnl.gov/schulzm CASC @ Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, USA

1 0

Re: [Mpi-forum] Did we screw up the const bindings in MPI-3?
by Kathryn Mohror 25 May '13

25 May '13

Hi Marc-Andre, Yes, we probably should move this discussion to tools from now on since it's getting into more technical details. Please send the information about your wrapper generator to both me and Martin. Thanks! Kathryn > >> I haven't tried it with PnMPI (I'll try to do that before the meeting >> in San Jose), but we scan the mpi.h file. We have found this >> generally to be a good idea, since not always all routines are >> implemented and the tool works for MPI-1 and MPI-2 alike. > > In Scalasca and Score-P, we inspect the MPI library for the presence each PMPI symbol and then we only create wrappers for those calls where we found valid PMPI symbols. (When the prototypes are mangle, this would definitely need to be adapted.) > > The prototypes are predefined in an XML file. There, we also define additional attributes, such as whether a parameter in "input, output, or both". > >> From a tools community point of view it would be good to come with >> such a wrapper generator once and then have everyone use it, which >> would not only eliminate this issue, but also make the Fortran issue >> much simpler. > > As different tools groups might have different interests, it would be quite an undertaking. Still, it would definitely be good not to reinvent the wheel several times. > >> The tools WG is planing to have a discussion in San Jose on whether >> we can create such a wrapper infrastructure that actually produces >> Fortran implementations along with the C implementations, which may >> make the whole symbol naming issue unnecessary. Adding a C version to >> such a wrapper system would be trivial. > > Unfortunately, I won't be in San Jose. Maybe I'll prime someone (Martin? Kathryn?) with what our wrapper generator can and cannot do, as input into the discussion? > > Cheers, > Marc-Andre > > PS: Should we move this discussion to the tools mailing list? > -- > Marc-Andre Hermanns > German Research School for > Simulation Sciences GmbH > c/o Laboratory for Parallel Programming > 52062 Aachen | Germany > > Tel +49 241 80 99753 > Fax +49 241 80 6 99753 > Web www.grs-sim.de > > Members: Forschungszentrum Jülich GmbH | RWTH Aachen University > Registered in the commercial register of the local court of > Düren (Amtsgericht Düren) under registration number HRB 5268 > Registered office: Jülich > Executive board: Prof. Marek Behr, Ph.D | Prof. Dr. Sebastian M. Schmidt > _______________________________________________ > mpi-forum mailing list > mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum ______________________________________________________________ Kathryn Mohror, kathryn(a)llnl.gov, http://people.llnl.gov/mohror1 CASC @ Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA, USA

1 0

Re: [Mpi-forum] Did we screw up the const bindings in MPI-3?
by Marc-Andre Hermanns 25 May '13

25 May '13

Hi Martin, > I haven't tried it with PnMPI (I'll try to do that before the meeting > in San Jose), but we scan the mpi.h file. We have found this > generally to be a good idea, since not always all routines are > implemented and the tool works for MPI-1 and MPI-2 alike. In Scalasca and Score-P, we inspect the MPI library for the presence each PMPI symbol and then we only create wrappers for those calls where we found valid PMPI symbols. (When the prototypes are mangle, this would definitely need to be adapted.) The prototypes are predefined in an XML file. There, we also define additional attributes, such as whether a parameter in "input, output, or both". > From a tools community point of view it would be good to come with > such a wrapper generator once and then have everyone use it, which > would not only eliminate this issue, but also make the Fortran issue > much simpler. As different tools groups might have different interests, it would be quite an undertaking. Still, it would definitely be good not to reinvent the wheel several times. > The tools WG is planing to have a discussion in San Jose on whether > we can create such a wrapper infrastructure that actually produces > Fortran implementations along with the C implementations, which may > make the whole symbol naming issue unnecessary. Adding a C version to > such a wrapper system would be trivial. Unfortunately, I won't be in San Jose. Maybe I'll prime someone (Martin? Kathryn?) with what our wrapper generator can and cannot do, as input into the discussion? Cheers, Marc-Andre PS: Should we move this discussion to the tools mailing list? -- Marc-Andre Hermanns German Research School for Simulation Sciences GmbH c/o Laboratory for Parallel Programming 52062 Aachen | Germany Tel +49 241 80 99753 Fax +49 241 80 6 99753 Web www.grs-sim.de Members: Forschungszentrum Jï¿½lich GmbH | RWTH Aachen University Registered in the commercial register of the local court of Dï¿½ren (Amtsgericht Dï¿½ren) under registration number HRB 5268 Registered office: Jï¿½lich Executive board: Prof. Marek Behr, Ph.D | Prof. Dr. Sebastian M. Schmidt

1 0

Re: [Mpi-forum] Last call for agenda items for the June meeting
by Schulz, Martin 24 May '13

24 May '13

Hi Pavan, all, On May 21, 2013, at 9:34 AM, Pavan Balaji <balaji(a)mcs.anl.gov> wrote: > Martin, > > Can you confirm that this is the only ticket that is being voted on at > this meeting? > > https://svn.mpi-forum.org/trac/mpi-forum-web/ticket/354 Yes, that is correct - this is the only vote that was requested. Also, since nobody objected and the ticket is trivial, I'll move the vote up to Thursday as well. I will update and finalize the agenda either later tonight or tomorrow morning. Thanks, Martin > > -- Pavan > > On 05/21/2013 08:28 AM US Central Time, Schulz, Martin wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> Just as a reminder, please send me any official items for the agenda of the June forum by 1pm PT today. In particular, please let me know if there are any errata items (or other items that require votes). >> >> So far, I have only received one such item, which seems rather trivial. If this stays this way, I am thinking about moving this single vote to Thursday afternoon (and skip the usual overnight wait time), since I had requests for this to accommodate travel schedules. However, if there are *ANY* objections against that, please let me know and we'll keep the usual and agreed upon Thursday reading / Friday vote schedule. >> >> Thanks! >> >> Martin >> >> >> ________________________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> > > -- > Pavan Balaji > http://www.mcs.anl.gov/~balaji ________________________________________________________________________ Martin Schulz, schulzm(a)llnl.gov, http://people.llnl.gov/schulzm CASC @ Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, USA

1 0

Re: [Mpi-forum] Last call for agenda items for the June meeting
by Schulz, Martin 24 May '13

24 May '13

Hi Pavan, all, On May 21, 2013, at 9:34 AM, Pavan Balaji <balaji(a)mcs.anl.gov> wrote: > Martin, > > Can you confirm that this is the only ticket that is being voted on at > this meeting? > > https://svn.mpi-forum.org/trac/mpi-forum-web/ticket/354 Yes, that is correct - this is the only vote that was requested. Also, since nobody objected and the ticket is trivial, I'll move the vote up to Thursday as well. I will update and finalize the agenda either later tonight or tomorrow morning. Thanks, Martin > > -- Pavan > > On 05/21/2013 08:28 AM US Central Time, Schulz, Martin wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> Just as a reminder, please send me any official items for the agenda of the June forum by 1pm PT today. In particular, please let me know if there are any errata items (or other items that require votes). >> >> So far, I have only received one such item, which seems rather trivial. If this stays this way, I am thinking about moving this single vote to Thursday afternoon (and skip the usual overnight wait time), since I had requests for this to accommodate travel schedules. However, if there are *ANY* objections against that, please let me know and we'll keep the usual and agreed upon Thursday reading / Friday vote schedule. >> >> Thanks! >> >> Martin >> >> >> ________________________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> > > -- > Pavan Balaji > http://www.mcs.anl.gov/~balaji ________________________________________________________________________ Martin Schulz, schulzm(a)llnl.gov, http://people.llnl.gov/schulzm CASC @ Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, USA

1 0

Re: [Mpi-forum] Did we screw up the const bindings in MPI-3?
by Schulz, Martin 24 May '13

24 May '13

I haven't tried it with PnMPI (I'll try to do that before the meeting in San Jose), but we scan the mpi.h file. We have found this generally to be a good idea, since not always all routines are implemented and the tool works for MPI-1 and MPI-2 alike. In general, though, tools basically implement the MPI routines and with changing prototypes, they have to change as well. If a tool has a static wrapper, it needs #ifdefs for MPI-3 anyway to cover the new MPI routines. >From a tools community point of view it would be good to come with such a wrapper generator once and then have everyone use it, which would not only eliminate this issue, but also make the Fortran issue much simpler. The tools WG is planing to have a discussion in San Jose on whether we can create such a wrapper infrastructure that actually produces Fortran implementations along with the C implementations, which may make the whole symbol naming issue unnecessary. Adding a C version to such a wrapper system would be trivial. Martin On May 23, 2013, at 3:37 PM, Pavan Balaji <balaji(a)mcs.anl.gov> wrote: > > On 05/23/2013 03:59 AM US Central Time, Marc-Andre Hermanns wrote: >> we had a similar reports from Scalasca users on systems with MPICH3. > > It's "MPICH", whose latest version is 3.0.4. Please don't advertise > "MPICH3" anywhere :-). > >> We solved it for us with a preprocessor macro that is prepended to all >> relevant buffer parameters. Depending on the MPI version the macro >> resolves to a 'const' or not. Quite low-tech, I know. ;-) > > I'm not saying it cannot be solved. In fact, we proposed a similar > solution to the Tau folks. I'm just saying it's not backward > compatible. But maybe I was the only person surprised by that. > > -- Pavan > > -- > 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 ________________________________________________________________________ Martin Schulz, schulzm(a)llnl.gov, http://people.llnl.gov/schulzm CASC @ Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, USA

1 0

Re: [Mpi-forum] Fwd: Ticket 375: Message Queue side document
by Anh Vo 24 May '13

24 May '13

Hi all, I've updated ticket 375 with the latest proposal PDF. Thanks Anh -----Original Message----- From: mpi-forum-bounces(a)lists.mpi-forum.org [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2013 8:02 AM To: Martin Schulz; Main MPI Forum mailing list Subject: Re: [Mpi-forum] Fwd: Ticket 375: Message Queue side document Cisco has no problem with this, and will be happy to vote "yes" for extending the "MQS" message queue side document's deadline until this Friday. On May 22, 2013, at 10:56 AM, "Schulz, Martin" <schulzm(a)llnl.gov> wrote: > Hi all, > > Please find below the announcement for ticket #375 for a possible reading at the June meeting. Anh tried sending it in time yesterday, but they are apparently some glitches with the email list. Did anybody else try sending something to the list that they later did not see being posted? > > Thanks! > > Martin > > PS: Please see Anh's request below - according to the vote document we passed last time, the forum has the ability to be flexible with time constraints, but only if every voting eligible member institution agrees to this in a formal vote. Therefore, if there are *ANY* concerns, please let Anh and Kathryn (as the tools WG chair) know ahead of time, so they can plan accordingly. > >> >> >> From: Anh Vo >> Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2013 2:03 PM >> To: Main MPI Forum mailing list (mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org) >> Subject: Ticket 375: Message Queue side document >> >> >> >> Hi all, >> >> Currently the MQS is scheduled for official reading on Thursday June >> 6th >> >> http://meetings.mpi-forum.org/secretary/2013/06/agenda.php >> >> >> >> I've created a ticket (375) and attached the latest PDF: >> >> https://svn.mpi-forum.org/trac/mpi-forum-web/ticket/375 >> >> >> >> However, we would like to ask if it'd be okay if the final document for reading be a few days late (i.e., by Friday noon PST) for the following reasons: >> >> >> >> 1. It's actively being worked on >> >> 2. It's narrow in scope >> >> 3. It's a side document >> >> 4. We're waiting for and incorporating all the feedback, which has taken a while to gather >> >> 5. We're documenting current practice >> >> >> >> Thanks >> >> Anh >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > ______________________________________________________________________ > __ 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 -- 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] [mpich-core] Did we screw up the const bindings in MPI-3?
by William Gropp 23 May '13

23 May '13

Sorry, I won't be at the meeting - its my only week home in June, with overseas trips (different continents) on both sides of the MPI meeting. Bill William Gropp Director, Parallel Computing Institute Deputy Director for Research Institute for Advanced Computing Applications and Technologies Thomas M. Siebel Chair in Computer Science University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign On May 23, 2013, at 11:26 AM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) wrote: > On May 23, 2013, at 8:40 AM, William Gropp <wgropp(a)illinois.edu> wrote: > >> Fortran is another story. I'm very concerned about the amount of effort in both implementation and testing that appears to be required. > > Bill -- will you be at the upcoming Forum meeting? We're going to spend a bunch of time talking about exactly this issue (Fortran+Tools). > > -- > 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] Did we screw up the const bindings in MPI-3?
by Pavan Balaji 23 May '13

23 May '13

On 05/23/2013 03:59 AM US Central Time, Marc-Andre Hermanns wrote: > we had a similar reports from Scalasca users on systems with MPICH3. It's "MPICH", whose latest version is 3.0.4. Please don't advertise "MPICH3" anywhere :-). > We solved it for us with a preprocessor macro that is prepended to all > relevant buffer parameters. Depending on the MPI version the macro > resolves to a 'const' or not. Quite low-tech, I know. ;-) I'm not saying it cannot be solved. In fact, we proposed a similar solution to the Tau folks. I'm just saying it's not backward compatible. But maybe I was the only person surprised by that. -- Pavan -- Pavan Balaji http://www.mcs.anl.gov/~balaji

1 0

Re: [Mpi-forum] [mpich-core] Did we screw up the const bindings in MPI-3?
by Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) 23 May '13

23 May '13

On May 23, 2013, at 8:40 AM, William Gropp <wgropp(a)illinois.edu> wrote: > Fortran is another story. I'm very concerned about the amount of effort in both implementation and testing that appears to be required. Bill -- will you be at the upcoming Forum meeting? We're going to spend a bunch of time talking about exactly this issue (Fortran+Tools). -- Jeff Squyres jsquyres(a)cisco.com For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/

1 0