For your info: I informed the providers of independent MPI libraries with Fortran bindings about a serious problem with the definition of Fortran datatypes. My apologies if I missed some of the independent MPI libraries. In this case, please also run the program and please send the result to me. Best regards Rolf ----- Forwarded Message ----- From: "Rolf Rabenseifner" <[email protected]> To: "Richard Treumann" <[email protected]>, "Rajeev Thakur" <[email protected]>, "Jeff Squyres" <[email protected]>, "Shinji Sumimoto" <[email protected]>, "Hubert Ritzdorf" <[email protected]>, "Fab Tillier" <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2011 5:15:15 PM Subject: Serious problem/bug in MPI libraries with the alignment of MPI_DOUBLE_PRECISION Dear all, as far as I know, you represent some MPI libraries that are not directly based on another one in the list: - mpich2: Rajeev - OpenMPI: Jeff - IBM: Rich Treumann - NEC: Hubert - Fujitsu: Shinji Sumimoto - Microsoft: Fab (Which independent library is missing on this list?) (Who of the list uses already mich2 or OpenMPI as bases or does not provide a Fortran binding, and can be therefore removed from this list?) The problem is simple and has at the end only three numbers: Aligments of: - DOUBLE PRECISION within a SEQUENCE derived type = 4 (e.g. with Intel) - DOUBLE PRECISION within a BIND(C) derived type = 8 - MPI_DOUBLE_PRECISION (= k_i in MPI-2.2 p.78:45) = 4 or 8 The details: Which is the alignment of Fortran DOUBLE PRECISION according to k_i on MPI-2.2, page 78 line 45 and page 96 line 42. Since 1977 (Fortran 77) in Fortran COMMON blocks and 1990 (Fortran 90) in Fortran SEQUENCE derived types (which have the same memory layout according to the SEQUENCE-rules), the MPI alignment and the Fortran alignment in such constructs should be the same, e.g., the Intel compiler has alignment 4 !!! This may be significantly different to C, where Intel uses alignment 8! With Fortran 2003, we got the Fortran BIND(C) derived types. Here, a Fortran DOUBLE PRECISION has with Intel's compiler the aligment 8. As far as I understand, mpich2 and Cray produce following results with an Intel compiler: Aligments of: - DOUBLE PRECISION within a SEQUENCE derived type = 4 - DOUBLE PRECISION within a BIND(C) derived type = 8 - MPI_DOUBLE_PRECISION (= k_i in MPI-2.2 p.78:45) = 8 This is definitely wrong compared to MPI-1.1 and MPI-2.0 but may be helpful for MPI-3.0 when we like to switch to a definition that is based on BIND(C). Question: What is the output of the attached test program when running with - your MPI library - and your compiler - and with Intel's compiler Please can you send me the output of such mpiruns? Thanks in advance and best regards Rolf PS: We need not to care about 8/8/8. Only 4/8/x causes problems: If all those have x=8 then I'll propose to adopt the MPI-3.0 to the reality. If we have some implementations with 4/8/8 and others with 4/8/4 then we have a serious problem because only one answer can be correct, and the question would be whether the historical answer (x=4) or the modern answer (x=8) should be chosen. -- Dr. Rolf Rabenseifner . . . . . . . . . .. email [email protected] High Performance Computing Center (HLRS) . phone ++49(0)711/685-65530 University of Stuttgart . . . . . . . . .. fax ++49(0)711 / 685-65832 Head of Dpmt Parallel Computing . . . www.hlrs.de/people/rabenseifner Nobelstr. 19, D-70550 Stuttgart, Germany . (Office: Allmandring 30) -- Dr. Rolf Rabenseifner . . . . . . . . . .. email [email protected] High Performance Computing Center (HLRS) . phone ++49(0)711/685-65530 University of Stuttgart . . . . . . . . .. fax ++49(0)711 / 685-65832 Head of Dpmt Parallel Computing . . . www.hlrs.de/people/rabenseifner Nobelstr. 19, D-70550 Stuttgart, Germany . (Office: Allmandring 30)