BIND(FORTRAN, name="MPI_Test_f08") seems like a great idea. Unfortunately I can't find it in the Fortran standard :-( Perhaps J3 would be amenable to adding FORTRAN to language-binding-spec. Craig Rasmussen CAS Scientific Programmer [email protected] On Mar 21, 2013, at 10:11 AM, Hubert Ritzdorf wrote:

...

I believe the NEC Fortran MPI API may do similar things.

This is right. The tool guys are mainly looking for a well-defined name. I think that it is a bad idea to kill backward compatibility, Fortran profiling interface and optimization possibilities of MPI implementers in order to get this well-defined name.

It would be possibly simpler to add a specific BIND(Fortran, name="MPI_Test_f08") to Fortran which sets the linker name instead of using BIND(C, name="MPI_Test_f08") and we could avoid all the interoperability problems which were found till now (and in future).

MPI_Test is a relatively simple function. We have much more complex functions which might increase scalability problems (for example additional memory allocation for MPI_Alltoallw in order to transform datatypes, possibly counts, displacements) for this requested approach.

The upper routines/functions might become complex or cpu-time relevant (example: implementation of MPI_SUBARRAYS_SUPPORTED). In this case, the usage of performance (or debugging) tools which ignore the work in this upper functions (since these tools see only the C MPI functions) might become problematic.

Hubert ________________________________________ From: [email protected] [[email protected]] on behalf of Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) [[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 4:38 PM To: MPI-3 Fortran working group Cc: Martin Schulz Subject: Re: [MPI3 Fortran] [Mpi-comments] MPI 3.0: Fortran 2008 interface - issue with the LOGICAL kind

On Mar 21, 2013, at 8:26 AM, Craig Rasmussen <[email protected]> wrote:

...

I talked with Martin yesterday and he would be happy to have the requirement in the standard that the Fortran wrappers MUST call the MPI C interface. This would much simplify things for the tools community. (I had earlier thought he would object to this solution.)

No! This is NOT a good idea to mandate.

Open MPI currently has a bunch of Fortran functions that do NOT call the corresponding MPI_<foo> C function. Instead, they call some other back-end, internal function.

I believe the NEC Fortran MPI API may do similar things.

-- Jeff Squyres [email protected] For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/

_______________________________________________ mpi3-fortran mailing list [email protected] http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi3-fortran

Click https://www.mailcontrol.com/sr/Geaaq1rkMOPGX2PQPOmvUpJBCTqJzJUeYtFmk42MgAlOv... to report this email as spam.

_______________________________________________ mpi3-fortran mailing list [email protected] http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi3-fortran