- Mpi3-abi - mailman3.cels.anl.gov

Re: [Mpi3-abi] For the April MPI Forum Meeting
by unknown＠example.com 24 Apr '08

24 Apr '08

Thanks. Can we add MPICH2? It's different from MPICH. Also, there's slight drift between different MPICH2 versions. Should we address this at all, or just go for the latest and greatest (1.0.7)? -----Original Message----- From: mpi3-abi-bounces_at_[hidden] [mailto:mpi3-abi-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Jeff Brown Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2008 1:13 AM To: MPI 3.0 ABI working group; MPI 3.0 ABI working group; MPI 3.0 ABI working group; MPI 3.0 ABI working group Subject: Re: [Mpi3-abi] For the April MPI Forum Meeting Attached is the beginnings of a spreadsheet to capture the detailed differences in the mpi.h implementations with the OpenMPI column populated. I'll get a start at LAMPI before the telecon. I'll post to the wiki. Talk to y'all in the morning (well, my morning). Jeff At 01:42 PM 4/21/2008, Jeff Brown wrote: >all, > >I scheduled a telecon to discuss status and get somewhat organized >for the meeting: > >Thursday April 24, 10:00 MDT >local number: 606-1201(6-1201) >toll free number: 888 343-0702. > >I'll send out some slides for the 5 minute briefing for the group. > >I'm having a hard time finding time to devote to this, but I'll have >a cut at the OpenMPI and LAMPI analysis prior to the telecon. We >need someone to look at MPICH, and the vendor implementations need to >be posted. > >Jeff > > > >At 10:03 AM 4/16/2008, Jeff Brown wrote: > >Yes, it's time to put some cycles toward this. Let's start > >populating the matrix and have a telecon toward the end of next > >week. I'll schedule a WG working session at the meeting. > > > >I'll take a look at OpenMPI and LAMPI, the two primary MPI > >implementations we use at LANL, and post to the wiki by the end of > >the week. Others, please do the same for your MPI implementation > >(especially the vendors). Overlap is OK. > > > >I'll send out specifics on the telecon. Let's shoot for Thursday > >April 24, 9:00 A.M. MST. > > > >Jeff > > > >At 09:51 AM 4/16/2008, Narasimhan, Kannan wrote: > > >Folks, > > > > > >Are we planning on a WG update to report at the April 28-30 Forum > > >meeting? We have started the process of identifying the mpi.h > > >differences, but I dont think we have synthesized the data yet, or > > >come to any conclusions/next steps... Or did I miss something here? > > > > > >Thanx! > > >Kannan > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > > >From: mpi3-abi-bounces_at_[hidden] > > >[mailto:mpi3-abi-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Edric Ellis > > >Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 4:18 AM > > >To: MPI 3.0 ABI working group > > >Subject: Re: [Mpi3-abi] Meeting notes from 10th March > > > > > > > > >I'm not sure how best to express this, but there are a couple of > > >things that occur to me that might be important: > > > > > >1. The size of the handle types (cf. size of a pointer perhaps?) > > > > > >2. should we add some sort of table describing the current situation > > >as to how applications pick up the value of e.g. MPI_COMM_WORLD? E.g. > > >MPICH2 uses "#define MPI_COMM_WORLD 0x44000000", so that value is > > >burned into the binary; whereas OpenMPI uses extern pointers - i.e. > > >ompi_mpi_comm_world is in the initialized data section of libmpi.so, > > >and the value resolved at (dynamic) link time. > > > > > >Cheers, > > > > > >Edric. > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: mpi3-abi-bounces_at_[hidden] > > > [<mailto:mpi3-abi->mailto:mpi3-abi- > > > > bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Jeff Brown > > > > Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2008 10:11 PM > > > > To: MPI 3.0 ABI working group; mpi3-abi_at_[hidden] > > > > Subject: Re: [Mpi3-abi] Meeting notes from 10th March > > > > > > > > I propose a way we can make progress ... > > > > > > > > Let's start populating a matrix (excel spreadsheet) with a column for > > > > each MPI implementation, and rows for the various MPI datatypes, > > > > constants, etc. where the internal implementations varys. I'll kick > > > > it off for OpenMPI and send out. > > > > > > > > The last column of the matrix can be "ABI" where we propose a common > > > > approach across the implementations. > > > > > > > > A couple of driving principles: > > > > 1. the ABI solution shouldn't negatively impact quality of > > >implementation > > > > 2. minimize platform specific solutions > > > > > > > > I'd like to see if we can produce a single ABI that spans platforms. > > > > > > > > comments? > > > > > > > > Jeff > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > mpi3-abi mailing list > > > > mpi3-abi_at_[hidden] > > > > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi3-abi > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > >mpi3-abi mailing list > > >mpi3-abi_at_[hidden] > > >http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi3-abi > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > >mpi3-abi mailing list > > >mpi3-abi_at_[hidden] > > >http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi3-abi > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >mpi3-abi mailing list > >mpi3-abi_at_[hidden] > >http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi3-abi > > >_______________________________________________ >mpi3-abi mailing list >mpi3-abi_at_[hidden] >http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi3-abi --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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: [Mpi3-abi] For the April MPI Forum Meeting
by unknown＠example.com 23 Apr '08

23 Apr '08

go for it! At 06:59 PM 4/23/2008, Sameer Shende wrote: >Jeff, > I was wondering if we should add a column for MorphMPI >[http://sourceforge.net/projects/morphmpi] to the spreadsheet. > Thanks, > - Sameer > >_______________________________________________ >mpi3-abi mailing list >mpi3-abi_at_[hidden] >http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi3-abi

1 0

Re: [Mpi3-abi] For the April MPI Forum Meeting
by unknown＠example.com 23 Apr '08

23 Apr '08

Jeff, I was wondering if we should add a column for MorphMPI [http://sourceforge.net/projects/morphmpi] to the spreadsheet. Thanks, - Sameer

1 0

Re: [Mpi3-abi] For the April MPI Forum Meeting
by unknown＠example.com 23 Apr '08

23 Apr '08

Attached is the beginnings of a spreadsheet to capture the detailed differences in the mpi.h implementations with the OpenMPI column populated. I'll get a start at LAMPI before the telecon. I'll post to the wiki. Talk to y'all in the morning (well, my morning). Jeff At 01:42 PM 4/21/2008, Jeff Brown wrote: >all, > >I scheduled a telecon to discuss status and get somewhat organized >for the meeting: > >Thursday April 24, 10:00 MDT >local number: 606-1201(6-1201) >toll free number: 888 343-0702. > >I'll send out some slides for the 5 minute briefing for the group. > >I'm having a hard time finding time to devote to this, but I'll have >a cut at the OpenMPI and LAMPI analysis prior to the telecon. We >need someone to look at MPICH, and the vendor implementations need to >be posted. > >Jeff > > > >At 10:03 AM 4/16/2008, Jeff Brown wrote: > >Yes, it's time to put some cycles toward this. Let's start > >populating the matrix and have a telecon toward the end of next > >week. I'll schedule a WG working session at the meeting. > > > >I'll take a look at OpenMPI and LAMPI, the two primary MPI > >implementations we use at LANL, and post to the wiki by the end of > >the week. Others, please do the same for your MPI implementation > >(especially the vendors). Overlap is OK. > > > >I'll send out specifics on the telecon. Let's shoot for Thursday > >April 24, 9:00 A.M. MST. > > > >Jeff > > > >At 09:51 AM 4/16/2008, Narasimhan, Kannan wrote: > > >Folks, > > > > > >Are we planning on a WG update to report at the April 28-30 Forum > > >meeting? We have started the process of identifying the mpi.h > > >differences, but I dont think we have synthesized the data yet, or > > >come to any conclusions/next steps... Or did I miss something here? > > > > > >Thanx! > > >Kannan > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > > >From: mpi3-abi-bounces_at_[hidden] > > >[mailto:mpi3-abi-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Edric Ellis > > >Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 4:18 AM > > >To: MPI 3.0 ABI working group > > >Subject: Re: [Mpi3-abi] Meeting notes from 10th March > > > > > > > > >I'm not sure how best to express this, but there are a couple of > > >things that occur to me that might be important: > > > > > >1. The size of the handle types (cf. size of a pointer perhaps?) > > > > > >2. should we add some sort of table describing the current situation > > >as to how applications pick up the value of e.g. MPI_COMM_WORLD? E.g. > > >MPICH2 uses "#define MPI_COMM_WORLD 0x44000000", so that value is > > >burned into the binary; whereas OpenMPI uses extern pointers - i.e. > > >ompi_mpi_comm_world is in the initialized data section of libmpi.so, > > >and the value resolved at (dynamic) link time. > > > > > >Cheers, > > > > > >Edric. > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: mpi3-abi-bounces_at_[hidden] > > > [<mailto:mpi3-abi->mailto:mpi3-abi- > > > > bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Jeff Brown > > > > Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2008 10:11 PM > > > > To: MPI 3.0 ABI working group; mpi3-abi_at_[hidden] > > > > Subject: Re: [Mpi3-abi] Meeting notes from 10th March > > > > > > > > I propose a way we can make progress ... > > > > > > > > Let's start populating a matrix (excel spreadsheet) with a column for > > > > each MPI implementation, and rows for the various MPI datatypes, > > > > constants, etc. where the internal implementations varys. I'll kick > > > > it off for OpenMPI and send out. > > > > > > > > The last column of the matrix can be "ABI" where we propose a common > > > > approach across the implementations. > > > > > > > > A couple of driving principles: > > > > 1. the ABI solution shouldn't negatively impact quality of > > >implementation > > > > 2. minimize platform specific solutions > > > > > > > > I'd like to see if we can produce a single ABI that spans platforms. > > > > > > > > comments? > > > > > > > > Jeff > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > mpi3-abi mailing list > > > > mpi3-abi_at_[hidden] > > > > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi3-abi > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > >mpi3-abi mailing list > > >mpi3-abi_at_[hidden] > > >http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi3-abi > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > >mpi3-abi mailing list > > >mpi3-abi_at_[hidden] > > >http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi3-abi > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >mpi3-abi mailing list > >mpi3-abi_at_[hidden] > >http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi3-abi > > >_______________________________________________ >mpi3-abi mailing list >mpi3-abi_at_[hidden] >http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi3-abi *

1 0

Re: [Mpi3-abi] For the April MPI Forum Meeting
by unknown＠example.com 22 Apr '08

22 Apr '08

I will unfortunately be unable to attend this teleconference (I have a conflict). I'll comment on the slides, though. On Apr 21, 2008, at 3:42 PM, Jeff Brown wrote: > all, > > I scheduled a telecon to discuss status and get somewhat organized > for the meeting: > > Thursday April 24, 10:00 MDT > local number: 606-1201(6-1201) > toll free number: 888 343-0702. > > I'll send out some slides for the 5 minute briefing for the group. > > I'm having a hard time finding time to devote to this, but I'll have > a cut at the OpenMPI and LAMPI analysis prior to the telecon. We > need someone to look at MPICH, and the vendor implementations need to > be posted. > > Jeff > > > > At 10:03 AM 4/16/2008, Jeff Brown wrote: > >Yes, it's time to put some cycles toward this. Let's start > >populating the matrix and have a telecon toward the end of next > >week. I'll schedule a WG working session at the meeting. > > > >I'll take a look at OpenMPI and LAMPI, the two primary MPI > >implementations we use at LANL, and post to the wiki by the end of > >the week. Others, please do the same for your MPI implementation > >(especially the vendors). Overlap is OK. > > > >I'll send out specifics on the telecon. Let's shoot for Thursday > >April 24, 9:00 A.M. MST. > > > >Jeff > > > >At 09:51 AM 4/16/2008, Narasimhan, Kannan wrote: > > >Folks, > > > > > >Are we planning on a WG update to report at the April 28-30 Forum > > >meeting? We have started the process of identifying the mpi.h > > >differences, but I dont think we have synthesized the data yet, or > > >come to any conclusions/next steps... Or did I miss something here? > > > > > >Thanx! > > >Kannan > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > > >From: mpi3-abi-bounces_at_[hidden] > > >[mailto:mpi3-abi-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Edric > Ellis > > >Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 4:18 AM > > >To: MPI 3.0 ABI working group > > >Subject: Re: [Mpi3-abi] Meeting notes from 10th March > > > > > > > > >I'm not sure how best to express this, but there are a couple of > > >things that occur to me that might be important: > > > > > >1. The size of the handle types (cf. size of a pointer perhaps?) > > > > > >2. should we add some sort of table describing the current > situation > > >as to how applications pick up the value of e.g. MPI_COMM_WORLD? > E.g. > > >MPICH2 uses "#define MPI_COMM_WORLD 0x44000000", so that value is > > >burned into the binary; whereas OpenMPI uses extern pointers - i.e. > > >ompi_mpi_comm_world is in the initialized data section of > libmpi.so, > > >and the value resolved at (dynamic) link time. > > > > > >Cheers, > > > > > >Edric. > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: mpi3-abi-bounces_at_[hidden] > > > [<mailto:mpi3-abi->mailto:mpi3-abi- > > > > bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Jeff Brown > > > > Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2008 10:11 PM > > > > To: MPI 3.0 ABI working group; mpi3-abi_at_[hidden] > > > > Subject: Re: [Mpi3-abi] Meeting notes from 10th March > > > > > > > > I propose a way we can make progress ... > > > > > > > > Let's start populating a matrix (excel spreadsheet) with a > column for > > > > each MPI implementation, and rows for the various MPI datatypes, > > > > constants, etc. where the internal implementations varys. > I'll kick > > > > it off for OpenMPI and send out. > > > > > > > > The last column of the matrix can be "ABI" where we propose a > common > > > > approach across the implementations. > > > > > > > > A couple of driving principles: > > > > 1. the ABI solution shouldn't negatively impact quality of > > >implementation > > > > 2. minimize platform specific solutions > > > > > > > > I'd like to see if we can produce a single ABI that spans > platforms. > > > > > > > > comments? > > > > > > > > Jeff > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > mpi3-abi mailing list > > > > mpi3-abi_at_[hidden] > > > > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi3-abi > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > >mpi3-abi mailing list > > >mpi3-abi_at_[hidden] > > >http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi3-abi > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > >mpi3-abi mailing list > > >mpi3-abi_at_[hidden] > > >http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi3-abi > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >mpi3-abi mailing list > >mpi3-abi_at_[hidden] > >http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi3-abi > > > _______________________________________________ > mpi3-abi mailing list > mpi3-abi_at_[hidden] > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi3-abi > -- Jeff Squyres Cisco Systems

1 0

Re: [Mpi3-abi] For the April MPI Forum Meeting
by unknown＠example.com 21 Apr '08

21 Apr '08

all, I scheduled a telecon to discuss status and get somewhat organized for the meeting: Thursday April 24, 10:00 MDT local number: 606-1201(6-1201) toll free number: 888 343-0702. I'll send out some slides for the 5 minute briefing for the group. I'm having a hard time finding time to devote to this, but I'll have a cut at the OpenMPI and LAMPI analysis prior to the telecon. We need someone to look at MPICH, and the vendor implementations need to be posted. Jeff At 10:03 AM 4/16/2008, Jeff Brown wrote: >Yes, it's time to put some cycles toward this. Let's start >populating the matrix and have a telecon toward the end of next >week. I'll schedule a WG working session at the meeting. > >I'll take a look at OpenMPI and LAMPI, the two primary MPI >implementations we use at LANL, and post to the wiki by the end of >the week. Others, please do the same for your MPI implementation >(especially the vendors). Overlap is OK. > >I'll send out specifics on the telecon. Let's shoot for Thursday >April 24, 9:00 A.M. MST. > >Jeff > >At 09:51 AM 4/16/2008, Narasimhan, Kannan wrote: > >Folks, > > > >Are we planning on a WG update to report at the April 28-30 Forum > >meeting? We have started the process of identifying the mpi.h > >differences, but I dont think we have synthesized the data yet, or > >come to any conclusions/next steps... Or did I miss something here? > > > >Thanx! > >Kannan > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: mpi3-abi-bounces_at_[hidden] > >[mailto:mpi3-abi-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Edric Ellis > >Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 4:18 AM > >To: MPI 3.0 ABI working group > >Subject: Re: [Mpi3-abi] Meeting notes from 10th March > > > > > >I'm not sure how best to express this, but there are a couple of > >things that occur to me that might be important: > > > >1. The size of the handle types (cf. size of a pointer perhaps?) > > > >2. should we add some sort of table describing the current situation > >as to how applications pick up the value of e.g. MPI_COMM_WORLD? E.g. > >MPICH2 uses "#define MPI_COMM_WORLD 0x44000000", so that value is > >burned into the binary; whereas OpenMPI uses extern pointers - i.e. > >ompi_mpi_comm_world is in the initialized data section of libmpi.so, > >and the value resolved at (dynamic) link time. > > > >Cheers, > > > >Edric. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: mpi3-abi-bounces_at_[hidden] > > [<mailto:mpi3-abi->mailto:mpi3-abi- > > > bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Jeff Brown > > > Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2008 10:11 PM > > > To: MPI 3.0 ABI working group; mpi3-abi_at_[hidden] > > > Subject: Re: [Mpi3-abi] Meeting notes from 10th March > > > > > > I propose a way we can make progress ... > > > > > > Let's start populating a matrix (excel spreadsheet) with a column for > > > each MPI implementation, and rows for the various MPI datatypes, > > > constants, etc. where the internal implementations varys. I'll kick > > > it off for OpenMPI and send out. > > > > > > The last column of the matrix can be "ABI" where we propose a common > > > approach across the implementations. > > > > > > A couple of driving principles: > > > 1. the ABI solution shouldn't negatively impact quality of > >implementation > > > 2. minimize platform specific solutions > > > > > > I'd like to see if we can produce a single ABI that spans platforms. > > > > > > comments? > > > > > > Jeff > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > mpi3-abi mailing list > > > mpi3-abi_at_[hidden] > > > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi3-abi > > > >_______________________________________________ > >mpi3-abi mailing list > >mpi3-abi_at_[hidden] > >http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi3-abi > > > >_______________________________________________ > >mpi3-abi mailing list > >mpi3-abi_at_[hidden] > >http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi3-abi > > >_______________________________________________ >mpi3-abi mailing list >mpi3-abi_at_[hidden] >http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi3-abi

1 0

Re: [Mpi3-abi] For the April MPI Forum Meeting
by unknown＠example.com 16 Apr '08

16 Apr '08

Yes, it's time to put some cycles toward this. Let's start populating the matrix and have a telecon toward the end of next week. I'll schedule a WG working session at the meeting. I'll take a look at OpenMPI and LAMPI, the two primary MPI implementations we use at LANL, and post to the wiki by the end of the week. Others, please do the same for your MPI implementation (especially the vendors). Overlap is OK. I'll send out specifics on the telecon. Let's shoot for Thursday April 24, 9:00 A.M. MST. Jeff At 09:51 AM 4/16/2008, Narasimhan, Kannan wrote: >Folks, > >Are we planning on a WG update to report at the April 28-30 Forum >meeting? We have started the process of identifying the mpi.h >differences, but I dont think we have synthesized the data yet, or >come to any conclusions/next steps... Or did I miss something here? > >Thanx! >Kannan > >-----Original Message----- >From: mpi3-abi-bounces_at_[hidden] >[mailto:mpi3-abi-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Edric Ellis >Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 4:18 AM >To: MPI 3.0 ABI working group >Subject: Re: [Mpi3-abi] Meeting notes from 10th March > > >I'm not sure how best to express this, but there are a couple of >things that occur to me that might be important: > >1. The size of the handle types (cf. size of a pointer perhaps?) > >2. should we add some sort of table describing the current situation >as to how applications pick up the value of e.g. MPI_COMM_WORLD? E.g. >MPICH2 uses "#define MPI_COMM_WORLD 0x44000000", so that value is >burned into the binary; whereas OpenMPI uses extern pointers - i.e. >ompi_mpi_comm_world is in the initialized data section of libmpi.so, >and the value resolved at (dynamic) link time. > >Cheers, > >Edric. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: mpi3-abi-bounces_at_[hidden] > [<mailto:mpi3-abi->mailto:mpi3-abi- > > bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Jeff Brown > > Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2008 10:11 PM > > To: MPI 3.0 ABI working group; mpi3-abi_at_[hidden] > > Subject: Re: [Mpi3-abi] Meeting notes from 10th March > > > > I propose a way we can make progress ... > > > > Let's start populating a matrix (excel spreadsheet) with a column for > > each MPI implementation, and rows for the various MPI datatypes, > > constants, etc. where the internal implementations varys. I'll kick > > it off for OpenMPI and send out. > > > > The last column of the matrix can be "ABI" where we propose a common > > approach across the implementations. > > > > A couple of driving principles: > > 1. the ABI solution shouldn't negatively impact quality of >implementation > > 2. minimize platform specific solutions > > > > I'd like to see if we can produce a single ABI that spans platforms. > > > > comments? > > > > Jeff > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > mpi3-abi mailing list > > mpi3-abi_at_[hidden] > > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi3-abi > >_______________________________________________ >mpi3-abi mailing list >mpi3-abi_at_[hidden] >http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi3-abi > >_______________________________________________ >mpi3-abi mailing list >mpi3-abi_at_[hidden] >http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi3-abi

1 0

Re: [Mpi3-abi] For the April MPI Forum Meeting
by unknown＠example.com 16 Apr '08

16 Apr '08

Folks, Are we planning on a WG update to report at the April 28-30 Forum meeting? We have started the process of identifying the mpi.h differences, but I dont think we have synthesized the data yet, or come to any conclusions/next steps... Or did I miss something here? Thanx! Kannan -----Original Message----- From: mpi3-abi-bounces_at_[hidden] [mailto:mpi3-abi-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Edric Ellis Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 4:18 AM To: MPI 3.0 ABI working group Subject: Re: [Mpi3-abi] Meeting notes from 10th March I'm not sure how best to express this, but there are a couple of things that occur to me that might be important: 1. The size of the handle types (cf. size of a pointer perhaps?) 2. should we add some sort of table describing the current situation as to how applications pick up the value of e.g. MPI_COMM_WORLD? E.g. MPICH2 uses "#define MPI_COMM_WORLD 0x44000000", so that value is burned into the binary; whereas OpenMPI uses extern pointers - i.e. ompi_mpi_comm_world is in the initialized data section of libmpi.so, and the value resolved at (dynamic) link time. Cheers, Edric. > -----Original Message----- > From: mpi3-abi-bounces_at_[hidden] [mailto:mpi3-abi- > bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Jeff Brown > Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2008 10:11 PM > To: MPI 3.0 ABI working group; mpi3-abi_at_[hidden] > Subject: Re: [Mpi3-abi] Meeting notes from 10th March > > I propose a way we can make progress ... > > Let's start populating a matrix (excel spreadsheet) with a column for > each MPI implementation, and rows for the various MPI datatypes, > constants, etc. where the internal implementations varys. I'll kick > it off for OpenMPI and send out. > > The last column of the matrix can be "ABI" where we propose a common > approach across the implementations. > > A couple of driving principles: > 1. the ABI solution shouldn't negatively impact quality of implementation > 2. minimize platform specific solutions > > I'd like to see if we can produce a single ABI that spans platforms. > > comments? > > Jeff > > > _______________________________________________ > mpi3-abi mailing list > mpi3-abi_at_[hidden] > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi3-abi _______________________________________________ mpi3-abi mailing list mpi3-abi_at_[hidden] http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi3-abi

1 0

Re: [Mpi3-abi] MPI-3 ABI proposal
by unknown＠example.com 01 Apr '08

01 Apr '08

Thanks, got you. There's no LaTeX template for a proposal yet. Rich actually introduced a Wiki page template for the proposals in the FT subgroup, but I'm not sure everybody followed that. I'm just reusing that one for my work. ________________________________ From: Jeff Brown [mailto:jeffb_at_[hidden]] Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 5:00 PM To: Supalov, Alexander Cc: mpi3-abi_at_[hidden] Subject: Re: MPI-3 ABI proposal We will follow whatever standard template Rich and company require for the proposal. The meat of the ABI proposal will be the matrix exposing the differences in the implementations and the proposed ABI common solution. We also need to include a process for ensuring that the implementations don't drift apart again. I intend to put some time into this over the next two weeks then schedule a telecon. I'll also ask for a WG session at the Chicago meeting. I don't think we will be ready to roll out a proposal to the group at the next meeting. Jeff At 05:41 AM 4/1/2008, you wrote: Dear Jeff, How are we doing on the ABI proposal? What format will we use? I'm working on a couple of other WG, and the Wiki seems to become the preferred way of developing proposals for discussion. I bet a conversion from the Word document to Wiki, in case that's desirable, won't be too cumbersome. Best regards. Alexander -- Dr Alexander Supalov Intel GmbH Hermuelheimer Strasse 8a 50321 Bruehl, Germany Phone: +49 2232 209034 Mobile: +49 173 511 8735 Fax: +49 2232 209029 --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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. --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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: [Mpi3-abi] MPI-3 ABI proposal
by unknown＠example.com 01 Apr '08

01 Apr '08

We will follow whatever standard template Rich and company require for the proposal. The meat of the ABI proposal will be the matrix exposing the differences in the implementations and the proposed ABI common solution. We also need to include a process for ensuring that the implementations don't drift apart again. I intend to put some time into this over the next two weeks then schedule a telecon. I'll also ask for a WG session at the Chicago meeting. I don't think we will be ready to roll out a proposal to the group at the next meeting. Jeff At 05:41 AM 4/1/2008, you wrote: >Dear Jeff, > >How are we doing on the ABI proposal? What format will we use? I'm >working on a couple of other WG, and the Wiki seems to become the >preferred way of developing proposals for discussion. I bet a >conversion from the Word document to Wiki, in case that's desirable, >won't be too cumbersome. > >Best regards. > >Alexander > >-- >Dr Alexander Supalov >Intel GmbH >Hermuelheimer Strasse 8a >50321 Bruehl, Germany >Phone: +49 2232 209034 >Mobile: +49 173 511 8735 >Fax: +49 2232 209029 > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >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