On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 8:33 AM, Jed Brown <[email protected]> wrote:

Dan Holmes <[email protected]> writes:

...

What is the current status of MPI 3.0 RMA support in vendor implementations?

Both MPICH and OpenMPI now claim full compliance.

Does it count as "full compliance" if there are open bugs that prevent large parts of the standard from being used?

https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/ompi/ticket/2656 https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/ompi/ticket/1905

The claim in 1905 is that memory corruption is experienced only if the datatype description does not fit within the eager limit, though I provided a test case in which an indexed block of size 1 fails. These two bugs are still present in trunk:

http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/users/2011/12/18045.php

+= https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/ompi/ticket/4438

It seems a stretch to claim "full" MPI-3 compliance when a major component of MPI-2 RMA still does not work. The user doesn't care whether it is called "bug" or "incomplete implementation"; they can't use the feature either way, though they might waste more time trying when it is called a "bug".

Please, we all know that the following implementation of MPI is compliant with 3.0 :-) mpi.h: #define MPI_VERSION 3 #define MPI_SUBVERSION 0 #define MPI_ // ln -s /dev/null libmpi.a

Perhaps a test suite should be gathered so that we can start to automate checking for implementation bugs/incomplete implementations. Bugs encountered in vendor implementations have been huge time sinks for a number of colleagues and for myself. This includes deadlock in MPI_Bcast and MPI_Comm_split, within the past year.

You mean like http://git.mpich.org/mpich.git/tree/HEAD:/test/mpi? Jeff -- Jeff Hammond [email protected]