Thanks. I think to have a complete picture we need to cover both unconfigured mpi.h.in files (if applicable), as well as instantiated 32- and 64-bit mpi.h files. -----Original Message----- From: mpi3-abi-bounces_at_[hidden] [mailto:mpi3-abi-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Erez Haba Sent: Saturday, March 15, 2008 1:00 AM To: MPI 3.0 ABI working group Subject: Re: [Mpi3-abi] Meeting notes from 10th March Thank you Alexander, I did not configure mpich2.mpi.h on purpose. The reason was to help us understand that mpich2 ABI varies base on configuration. For msmpi we took the approach to include the 64 vs 32 bit ifdef in the file rather than require configuring for the word width. I think that we'll need to understand the various configure issue. I'd like us to focus on 64 bit as it reveals more issue than 32 bit. (e.g., sizeof(void*) size is different than sizeof(int) in most cases) Thanks, .Erez -----Original Message----- From: mpi3-abi-bounces_at_[hidden] [mailto:mpi3-abi-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Supalov, Alexander Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 4:45 PM To: MPI 3.0 ABI working group Subject: Re: [Mpi3-abi] Meeting notes from 10th March Dear Erez, Thank you. I'm afraid that the MPICH2 mpi.h has not been configured - it carries configure macros in the datatypes definition part and elsewhere. By the way, I'm going to upload MPICH2 1.0.3 mpi.h early next week as a placeholder for Intel MPI mpi.h, pending legal OK for the latter. I'll need to instantiate this file. According to my experience, the result may depend on the platform and compiler used. What platform/compiler should we use for reference? At least, what word size should we target? I seek to eliminate an accidental apple to pears comparison here. Best regards. Alexander -----Original Message----- From: mpi3-abi-bounces_at_[hidden] [mailto:mpi3-abi-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Erez Haba Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 7:47 PM To: MPI 3.0 ABI working group Subject: Re: [Mpi3-abi] Meeting notes from 10th March I have posted the mpi.h files to the wiki page and started a table comparing the various implementations. See http://svn.mpi-forum.org/trac/mpi-forum-web/wiki/Compare_mpi_h Thanks, .Erez -----Original Message----- From: mpi3-abi-bounces_at_[hidden] [mailto:mpi3-abi-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Solt, David George Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 11:08 AM To: MPI 3.0 ABI working group Subject: Re: [Mpi3-abi] Meeting notes from 10th March I have to wonder if MPI_BOTTOM will cause us headaches. MPI_BOTTOM is meant to be used directly as an address. Our ABI would really have to specify exactly what that address is using either a constant or the address of a variable in the library. We have found that many non-compliant codes exist which assume that MPI_BOTTOM is zero. Assuming MPI_BOTTOM lives on to MPI-3, the ABI effort may want to dictate its value on a per-target architecture/OS basis, with ((void*) 0) the most obvious setting for nearly all targets. Dave -----Original Message----- From: mpi3-abi-bounces_at_[hidden] [mailto:mpi3-abi-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Jeff Squyres Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 11:36 AM To: MPI 3.0 ABI working group Subject: Re: [Mpi3-abi] Meeting notes from 10th March Perhaps you could just link to OMPI's header file -- it's a live copy of what's in our SVN repository: https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/ompi/browser/trunk/ompi/include/mpi.h.in On Mar 14, 2008, at 12:21 PM, Erez Haba wrote:
I will upload the various mpi.h files and start the table on the ABI wiki page.
-----Original Message----- From: mpi3-abi-bounces_at_[hidden] [mailto:mpi3-abi-bounces_at_[hidden] ] On Behalf Of Jeff Brown Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2008 3:11 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
-- Jeff Squyres Cisco Systems _______________________________________________ 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. _______________________________________________ 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.