February 2016 - mpiwg-hybridpm - mailman3.cels.anl.gov

Fwd: Join the webex *now*
by Daniel Holmes 09 Feb '16

09 Feb '16

Here's webex info https://cisco.webex.com/cisco/e.php?MTID=mc61a3fb672944a71cbc98902029be4b1 Pw: cVQ5yUW2 Call-in toll number (US/Canada) +1-408-525-6800 Call-in toll-free number (US/Canada) +1-866-432-9903 Access code: 207 724 847 Meeting number: 207 724 847 Cheers, Dan. -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: Join the webex *now* Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2016 16:02:29 +0000 From: Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) <jsquyres(a)cisco.com> To: Daniel Holmes <dholmes(a)epcc.ed.ac.uk> Argh -- I couldn't schedule one, so I had to start it right now. Please join so that I can xfer control to you and then join my other meeting: https://cisco.webex.com/cisco/e.php?MTID=mc61a3fb672944a71cbc98902029be4b1 Pw: cVQ5yUW2 -- Jeff Squyres jsquyres(a)cisco.com For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/ -- Dan Holmes Applications Consultant in HPC Research EPCC, The University of Edinburgh James Clerk Maxwell Building The Kings Buildings Peter Guthrie Tait Road Edinburgh EH9 3FD T: +44(0)131 651 3465 E: dholmes(a)epcc.ed.ac.uk *Please consider the environment before printing this email.* The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in Scotland, with registration number SC005336.

1 0

Re: [mpiwg-hybridpm] Telecon today and extra meeting tomorrow (Tue 2/8 10:00 CST)
by Jeff Hammond 09 Feb '16

09 Feb '16

Steve: You should be able to dial in via simple telephone if someone shares the info. Jeff On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 7:57 AM, Steven Oyanagi <sko(a)cray.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Sorry, but I don’t think I am going to be able to be on the call today. > Cray has internal network problems, but the system is both phones and > internet connection. I had to scramble to find a connection to send this > message …. > - Steve > > -----Original Message----- > From: Steve Oyanagi <sko(a)cray.com> > Date: Monday, February 8, 2016 at 2:42 PM > To: "mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org" > <mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org> > Subject: Telecon today and extra meeting tomorrow (Tue 2/8 10:00 CST) > > >Hi, > > > >Sorry to drop off the call suddenly, but I had to leave for another > >meeting and didn’t want to interrupt the current discussion. > > > >I am planning on attending the extra meeting tomorrow (Tuesday 2/8, 10:00 > >CST - for an hour?). Please let me know how to connect to the meeting once > >it is determined. > > > >I will attempt to be ready to discuss pages 200-300 (I’m after Dan) > >tomorrow, but may not be ready. Listening to Pavan today I think I missed > >some things, I want to go back and check. > > > >Thanks, > > - Steve > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: mpiwg-hybridpm <mpiwg-hybridpm-bounces(a)lists.mpi-forum.org> on > >behalf of Pavan Balaji <balaji(a)anl.gov> > >Reply-To: "mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org" > ><mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org> > >Date: Sunday, February 7, 2016 at 8:25 PM > >To: "mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org" > ><mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org> > >Subject: Re: [mpiwg-hybridpm] Clarification of word 'process' > > > >> > >>I've pushed the changes for pages 1-100 as well (plus the front matter > >>before page 1). I have a bunch of notes on my changes that I'd like to > >>discuss on the call tomorrow. > >> > >> -- Pavan > >> > >>> On Feb 5, 2016, at 1:31 PM, Daniel Holmes <dholmes(a)epcc.ed.ac.uk> > >>>wrote: > >>> > >>> Hi all, > >>> > >>> I have just pushed a new branch into our mpiwg-hybrid git repo called > >>>"hybrid-process-clarification". > >>> It contains one commit: "Clarification of word 'process', pages > >>>101-200". > >>> I am anticipating that each person's changes can be recorded as a > >>>commit with a similar message to aid identification. > >>> > >>> There are a few instances that need discussion - specifically, when the > >>>new MPI_AINT arithmetic functions are talking about the scope of > >>>validity for the resulting addresses should that be OS process or MPI > >>>process? > >>> > >>> Cheers, > >>> Dan. > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Dan Holmes > >>> Applications Consultant in HPC Research > >>> EPCC, The University of Edinburgh > >>> James Clerk Maxwell Building > >>> The Kings Buildings > >>> Peter Guthrie Tait Road > >>> Edinburgh > >>> EH9 3FD > >>> T: +44(0)131 651 3465 > >>> E: dholmes(a)epcc.ed.ac.uk > >>> > >>> *Please consider the environment before printing this email.* > >>> > >>> > >>> The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in > >>> Scotland, with registration number SC005336. > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> mpiwg-hybridpm mailing list > >>> mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > >>> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-hybridpm > >> > >>_______________________________________________ > >>mpiwg-hybridpm mailing list > >>mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > >>http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-hybridpm > > > > _______________________________________________ > mpiwg-hybridpm mailing list > mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-hybridpm > -- Jeff Hammond jeff.science(a)gmail.com http://jeffhammond.github.io/

1 0

Re: [mpiwg-hybridpm] Telecon today and extra meeting tomorrow (Tue 2/8 10:00 CST)
by Daniel Holmes 09 Feb '16

09 Feb '16

Hi all, Jeff Squyres is setting up a webex right now. I will have details in under 5 minutes. Cheers, Dan. On 09/02/2016 15:57, Steven Oyanagi wrote: > Hi, > > Sorry, but I donï¿½t think I am going to be able to be on the call today. > Cray has internal network problems, but the system is both phones and > internet connection. I had to scramble to find a connection to send this > message ï¿½. > - Steve > > -----Original Message----- > From: Steve Oyanagi <sko(a)cray.com> > Date: Monday, February 8, 2016 at 2:42 PM > To: "mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org" > <mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org> > Subject: Telecon today and extra meeting tomorrow (Tue 2/8 10:00 CST) > >> Hi, >> >> Sorry to drop off the call suddenly, but I had to leave for another >> meeting and didnï¿½t want to interrupt the current discussion. >> >> I am planning on attending the extra meeting tomorrow (Tuesday 2/8, 10:00 >> CST - for an hour?). Please let me know how to connect to the meeting once >> it is determined. >> >> I will attempt to be ready to discuss pages 200-300 (Iï¿½m after Dan) >> tomorrow, but may not be ready. Listening to Pavan today I think I missed >> some things, I want to go back and check. >> >> Thanks, >> - Steve >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: mpiwg-hybridpm <mpiwg-hybridpm-bounces(a)lists.mpi-forum.org> on >> behalf of Pavan Balaji <balaji(a)anl.gov> >> Reply-To: "mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org" >> <mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org> >> Date: Sunday, February 7, 2016 at 8:25 PM >> To: "mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org" >> <mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org> >> Subject: Re: [mpiwg-hybridpm] Clarification of word 'process' >> >>> I've pushed the changes for pages 1-100 as well (plus the front matter >>> before page 1). I have a bunch of notes on my changes that I'd like to >>> discuss on the call tomorrow. >>> >>> -- Pavan >>> >>>> On Feb 5, 2016, at 1:31 PM, Daniel Holmes <dholmes(a)epcc.ed.ac.uk> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> I have just pushed a new branch into our mpiwg-hybrid git repo called >>>> "hybrid-process-clarification". >>>> It contains one commit: "Clarification of word 'process', pages >>>> 101-200". >>>> I am anticipating that each person's changes can be recorded as a >>>> commit with a similar message to aid identification. >>>> >>>> There are a few instances that need discussion - specifically, when the >>>> new MPI_AINT arithmetic functions are talking about the scope of >>>> validity for the resulting addresses should that be OS process or MPI >>>> process? >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Dan. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Dan Holmes >>>> Applications Consultant in HPC Research >>>> EPCC, The University of Edinburgh >>>> James Clerk Maxwell Building >>>> The Kings Buildings >>>> Peter Guthrie Tait Road >>>> Edinburgh >>>> EH9 3FD >>>> T: +44(0)131 651 3465 >>>> E: dholmes(a)epcc.ed.ac.uk >>>> >>>> *Please consider the environment before printing this email.* >>>> >>>> >>>> The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in >>>> Scotland, with registration number SC005336. >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> mpiwg-hybridpm mailing list >>>> mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >>>> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-hybridpm >>> _______________________________________________ >>> mpiwg-hybridpm mailing list >>> mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >>> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-hybridpm > _______________________________________________ > mpiwg-hybridpm mailing list > mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-hybridpm > -- Dan Holmes Applications Consultant in HPC Research EPCC, The University of Edinburgh James Clerk Maxwell Building The Kings Buildings Peter Guthrie Tait Road Edinburgh EH9 3FD T: +44(0)131 651 3465 E: dholmes(a)epcc.ed.ac.uk *Please consider the environment before printing this email.* The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in Scotland, with registration number SC005336.

1 0

Re: [mpiwg-hybridpm] Telecon today and extra meeting tomorrow (Tue 2/8 10:00 CST)
by Steven Oyanagi 09 Feb '16

09 Feb '16

Hi, Sorry, but I don’t think I am going to be able to be on the call today. Cray has internal network problems, but the system is both phones and internet connection. I had to scramble to find a connection to send this message …. - Steve -----Original Message----- From: Steve Oyanagi <sko(a)cray.com> Date: Monday, February 8, 2016 at 2:42 PM To: "mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org" <mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org> Subject: Telecon today and extra meeting tomorrow (Tue 2/8 10:00 CST) >Hi, > >Sorry to drop off the call suddenly, but I had to leave for another >meeting and didn’t want to interrupt the current discussion. > >I am planning on attending the extra meeting tomorrow (Tuesday 2/8, 10:00 >CST - for an hour?). Please let me know how to connect to the meeting once >it is determined. > >I will attempt to be ready to discuss pages 200-300 (I’m after Dan) >tomorrow, but may not be ready. Listening to Pavan today I think I missed >some things, I want to go back and check. > >Thanks, > - Steve > >-----Original Message----- >From: mpiwg-hybridpm <mpiwg-hybridpm-bounces(a)lists.mpi-forum.org> on >behalf of Pavan Balaji <balaji(a)anl.gov> >Reply-To: "mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org" ><mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org> >Date: Sunday, February 7, 2016 at 8:25 PM >To: "mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org" ><mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org> >Subject: Re: [mpiwg-hybridpm] Clarification of word 'process' > >> >>I've pushed the changes for pages 1-100 as well (plus the front matter >>before page 1). I have a bunch of notes on my changes that I'd like to >>discuss on the call tomorrow. >> >> -- Pavan >> >>> On Feb 5, 2016, at 1:31 PM, Daniel Holmes <dholmes(a)epcc.ed.ac.uk> >>>wrote: >>> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> I have just pushed a new branch into our mpiwg-hybrid git repo called >>>"hybrid-process-clarification". >>> It contains one commit: "Clarification of word 'process', pages >>>101-200". >>> I am anticipating that each person's changes can be recorded as a >>>commit with a similar message to aid identification. >>> >>> There are a few instances that need discussion - specifically, when the >>>new MPI_AINT arithmetic functions are talking about the scope of >>>validity for the resulting addresses should that be OS process or MPI >>>process? >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Dan. >>> >>> -- >>> Dan Holmes >>> Applications Consultant in HPC Research >>> EPCC, The University of Edinburgh >>> James Clerk Maxwell Building >>> The Kings Buildings >>> Peter Guthrie Tait Road >>> Edinburgh >>> EH9 3FD >>> T: +44(0)131 651 3465 >>> E: dholmes(a)epcc.ed.ac.uk >>> >>> *Please consider the environment before printing this email.* >>> >>> >>> The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in >>> Scotland, with registration number SC005336. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> mpiwg-hybridpm mailing list >>> mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >>> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-hybridpm >> >>_______________________________________________ >>mpiwg-hybridpm mailing list >>mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >>http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-hybridpm >

1 0

Re: [mpiwg-hybridpm] Telecon today and extra meeting tomorrow (Tue 2/8 10:00 CST)
by Balaji, Pavan 09 Feb '16

09 Feb '16

Looks like the regular webex doesn't work. Let's use this telecon number, unless someone else can setup a webex: Toll-free dial-in number: 1-866-398-2885 Toll dial-in number: 1-719-457-6209 Participant Passcode: 3141592 > On Feb 9, 2016, at 9:52 AM, Daniel Holmes <dholmes(a)epcc.ed.ac.uk> wrote: > > Hi all, > > Do we have connection details for the ad-hoc teleconference in 9 minutes? > > Cheers, > Dan. > > On 08/02/2016 20:42, Steven Oyanagi wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Sorry to drop off the call suddenly, but I had to leave for another >> meeting and didn’t want to interrupt the current discussion. >> >> I am planning on attending the extra meeting tomorrow (Tuesday 2/8, 10:00 >> CST - for an hour?). Please let me know how to connect to the meeting once >> it is determined. >> >> I will attempt to be ready to discuss pages 200-300 (I’m after Dan) >> tomorrow, but may not be ready. Listening to Pavan today I think I missed >> some things, I want to go back and check. >> >> Thanks, >> - Steve >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: mpiwg-hybridpm <mpiwg-hybridpm-bounces(a)lists.mpi-forum.org> on >> behalf of Pavan Balaji <balaji(a)anl.gov> >> Reply-To: "mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org" >> <mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org> >> Date: Sunday, February 7, 2016 at 8:25 PM >> To: "mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org" >> <mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org> >> Subject: Re: [mpiwg-hybridpm] Clarification of word 'process' >> >>> I've pushed the changes for pages 1-100 as well (plus the front matter >>> before page 1). I have a bunch of notes on my changes that I'd like to >>> discuss on the call tomorrow. >>> >>> -- Pavan >>> >>>> On Feb 5, 2016, at 1:31 PM, Daniel Holmes <dholmes(a)epcc.ed.ac.uk> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> I have just pushed a new branch into our mpiwg-hybrid git repo called >>>> "hybrid-process-clarification". >>>> It contains one commit: "Clarification of word 'process', pages >>>> 101-200". >>>> I am anticipating that each person's changes can be recorded as a >>>> commit with a similar message to aid identification. >>>> >>>> There are a few instances that need discussion - specifically, when the >>>> new MPI_AINT arithmetic functions are talking about the scope of >>>> validity for the resulting addresses should that be OS process or MPI >>>> process? >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Dan. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Dan Holmes >>>> Applications Consultant in HPC Research >>>> EPCC, The University of Edinburgh >>>> James Clerk Maxwell Building >>>> The Kings Buildings >>>> Peter Guthrie Tait Road >>>> Edinburgh >>>> EH9 3FD >>>> T: +44(0)131 651 3465 >>>> E: dholmes(a)epcc.ed.ac.uk >>>> >>>> *Please consider the environment before printing this email.* >>>> >>>> >>>> The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in >>>> Scotland, with registration number SC005336. >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> mpiwg-hybridpm mailing list >>>> mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >>>> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-hybridpm >>> _______________________________________________ >>> mpiwg-hybridpm mailing list >>> mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >>> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-hybridpm >> _______________________________________________ >> mpiwg-hybridpm mailing list >> mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-hybridpm >> > > -- > Dan Holmes > Applications Consultant in HPC Research > EPCC, The University of Edinburgh > James Clerk Maxwell Building > The Kings Buildings > Peter Guthrie Tait Road > Edinburgh > EH9 3FD > T: +44(0)131 651 3465 > E: dholmes(a)epcc.ed.ac.uk > > *Please consider the environment before printing this email.* > > > The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in > Scotland, with registration number SC005336. > > _______________________________________________ > mpiwg-hybridpm mailing list > mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-hybridpm

1 0

Re: [mpiwg-hybridpm] Telecon today and extra meeting tomorrow (Tue 2/8 10:00 CST)
by Daniel Holmes 09 Feb '16

09 Feb '16

Hi all, Do we have connection details for the ad-hoc teleconference in 9 minutes? Cheers, Dan. On 08/02/2016 20:42, Steven Oyanagi wrote: > Hi, > > Sorry to drop off the call suddenly, but I had to leave for another > meeting and didnï¿½t want to interrupt the current discussion. > > I am planning on attending the extra meeting tomorrow (Tuesday 2/8, 10:00 > CST - for an hour?). Please let me know how to connect to the meeting once > it is determined. > > I will attempt to be ready to discuss pages 200-300 (Iï¿½m after Dan) > tomorrow, but may not be ready. Listening to Pavan today I think I missed > some things, I want to go back and check. > > Thanks, > - Steve > > -----Original Message----- > From: mpiwg-hybridpm <mpiwg-hybridpm-bounces(a)lists.mpi-forum.org> on > behalf of Pavan Balaji <balaji(a)anl.gov> > Reply-To: "mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org" > <mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org> > Date: Sunday, February 7, 2016 at 8:25 PM > To: "mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org" > <mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org> > Subject: Re: [mpiwg-hybridpm] Clarification of word 'process' > >> I've pushed the changes for pages 1-100 as well (plus the front matter >> before page 1). I have a bunch of notes on my changes that I'd like to >> discuss on the call tomorrow. >> >> -- Pavan >> >>> On Feb 5, 2016, at 1:31 PM, Daniel Holmes <dholmes(a)epcc.ed.ac.uk> wrote: >>> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> I have just pushed a new branch into our mpiwg-hybrid git repo called >>> "hybrid-process-clarification". >>> It contains one commit: "Clarification of word 'process', pages >>> 101-200". >>> I am anticipating that each person's changes can be recorded as a >>> commit with a similar message to aid identification. >>> >>> There are a few instances that need discussion - specifically, when the >>> new MPI_AINT arithmetic functions are talking about the scope of >>> validity for the resulting addresses should that be OS process or MPI >>> process? >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Dan. >>> >>> -- >>> Dan Holmes >>> Applications Consultant in HPC Research >>> EPCC, The University of Edinburgh >>> James Clerk Maxwell Building >>> The Kings Buildings >>> Peter Guthrie Tait Road >>> Edinburgh >>> EH9 3FD >>> T: +44(0)131 651 3465 >>> E: dholmes(a)epcc.ed.ac.uk >>> >>> *Please consider the environment before printing this email.* >>> >>> >>> The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in >>> Scotland, with registration number SC005336. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> mpiwg-hybridpm mailing list >>> mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >>> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-hybridpm >> _______________________________________________ >> mpiwg-hybridpm mailing list >> mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-hybridpm > _______________________________________________ > mpiwg-hybridpm mailing list > mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-hybridpm > -- Dan Holmes Applications Consultant in HPC Research EPCC, The University of Edinburgh James Clerk Maxwell Building The Kings Buildings Peter Guthrie Tait Road Edinburgh EH9 3FD T: +44(0)131 651 3465 E: dholmes(a)epcc.ed.ac.uk *Please consider the environment before printing this email.* The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in Scotland, with registration number SC005336.

1 0

Re: [mpiwg-hybridpm] mpiwg-hybridpm Digest, Vol 69, Issue 1
by Jeff Hammond 08 Feb '16

08 Feb '16

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 7:24 AM, Halim Amer <aamer(a)anl.gov> wrote: > All, > > I have pushed my changes to pages 401-500. There are some instances that > were not clear whether they required the change, so I am providing some > notes below in addition to other questions. We could discuss this during > today's meeting. > > 0. Shall we update the figures to reflect the change? We are the original > raw figures? > > 1. I think “processes” is a generic term and should be left as it is in: > P435: “We assume that systems have a public memory region that is > addressable by all processes.” > P436: “This communication paradigm is closest to a shared memory model, > where shared data can be accessed by all processes, irrespective of > location.” > > 2. In this sentence, the coarse-grained locks refer to the MPI window > locks, right? I left it as it is, but it might have to change into “MPI > window locks” > P439: “RMA does not define fine-grained mutexes in memory (only logical > coarse-grained process locks)” > > Correct. MPI_Win_lock is capable of establishing a critical section on a (MPI window,MPI process) pair, when MPI_LOCK_EXCLUSIVE is used. > 3. Several instances of the expression “process memory” in the semantics > and correctness section were not preceded by origin, target, or other terms > that define them (P453~). When prefixing the expression with “MPI”, the > expression does not read well. I added “an” to identify an arbitrary MPI > process, which seems correct in those contexts, but I think it needs to be > reviewed carefully. > > We should just make it clear that all references to process and process memory in the RMA chapter refer to MPI processes. I'd much rather make an O(1) change than rewrite a few dozen sentences, particularly since it's relatively clear what the intent is without any text changes. 4. I think multi-process can be left as it is in (P458): > “In the RMA unified model, although the public and private copies > of the windows are synchronized, caution must be used when > combining load/stores and multi-process synchronization.” > I am not sure if it makes sense to change it into multi-endpoint later > though. > > "combining load/stores and multi-process synchronization" -> "combining load/stores and MPI synchronization" seems adequate. EOM > 5. I changed in several examples “Process A/B/0/1” into “MPI process > A/B/0/1”, though am not sure it is necessary. > > 6. I think it is better to add the term MPI here, but we might consider > removing the term thread because it is superfluous (P479): > “A call to MPI_GREQUEST_COMPLETE may unblock a blocked user > process/thread.” > > 7. Are we supposed to use MPI or \MPI? The threading-interface section > already uses \MPI process all over the place > > Regards, > --Halim > > www.mcs.anl.gov/~aamer > > On 2/6/16 11:00 AM, mpiwg-hybridpm-request(a)lists.mpi-forum.org wrote: > >> Send mpiwg-hybridpm mailing list submissions to >> mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >> >> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-hybridpm >> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >> mpiwg-hybridpm-request(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >> >> You can reach the person managing the list at >> mpiwg-hybridpm-owner(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >> >> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >> than "Re: Contents of mpiwg-hybridpm digest..." >> >> >> Today's Topics: >> >> 1. Clarification of word 'process' (Daniel Holmes) >> 2. Re: Clarification of word 'process' (Jeff Hammond) >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Message: 1 >> Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2016 19:31:55 +0000 >> From: Daniel Holmes <dholmes(a)epcc.ed.ac.uk> >> To: Hybrid WG <mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org> >> Subject: [mpiwg-hybridpm] Clarification of word 'process' >> Message-ID: <56B4F8AB.7000508(a)epcc.ed.ac.uk> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed >> >> Hi all, >> >> I have just pushed a new branch into our mpiwg-hybrid git repo called >> "hybrid-process-clarification". >> It contains one commit: "Clarification of word 'process', pages 101-200". >> I am anticipating that each person's changes can be recorded as a commit >> with a similar message to aid identification. >> >> There are a few instances that need discussion - specifically, when the >> new MPI_AINT arithmetic functions are talking about the scope of >> validity for the resulting addresses should that be OS process or MPI >> process? >> >> Cheers, >> Dan. >> >> _______________________________________________ > mpiwg-hybridpm mailing list > mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-hybridpm > -- Jeff Hammond jeff.science(a)gmail.com http://jeffhammond.github.io/

1 0

Telecon today and extra meeting tomorrow (Tue 2/8 10:00 CST)
by Steven Oyanagi 08 Feb '16

08 Feb '16

Hi, Sorry to drop off the call suddenly, but I had to leave for another meeting and didn’t want to interrupt the current discussion. I am planning on attending the extra meeting tomorrow (Tuesday 2/8, 10:00 CST - for an hour?). Please let me know how to connect to the meeting once it is determined. I will attempt to be ready to discuss pages 200-300 (I’m after Dan) tomorrow, but may not be ready. Listening to Pavan today I think I missed some things, I want to go back and check. Thanks, - Steve -----Original Message----- From: mpiwg-hybridpm <mpiwg-hybridpm-bounces(a)lists.mpi-forum.org> on behalf of Pavan Balaji <balaji(a)anl.gov> Reply-To: "mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org" <mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org> Date: Sunday, February 7, 2016 at 8:25 PM To: "mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org" <mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org> Subject: Re: [mpiwg-hybridpm] Clarification of word 'process' > >I've pushed the changes for pages 1-100 as well (plus the front matter >before page 1). I have a bunch of notes on my changes that I'd like to >discuss on the call tomorrow. > > -- Pavan > >> On Feb 5, 2016, at 1:31 PM, Daniel Holmes <dholmes(a)epcc.ed.ac.uk> wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> >> I have just pushed a new branch into our mpiwg-hybrid git repo called >>"hybrid-process-clarification". >> It contains one commit: "Clarification of word 'process', pages >>101-200". >> I am anticipating that each person's changes can be recorded as a >>commit with a similar message to aid identification. >> >> There are a few instances that need discussion - specifically, when the >>new MPI_AINT arithmetic functions are talking about the scope of >>validity for the resulting addresses should that be OS process or MPI >>process? >> >> Cheers, >> Dan. >> >> -- >> Dan Holmes >> Applications Consultant in HPC Research >> EPCC, The University of Edinburgh >> James Clerk Maxwell Building >> The Kings Buildings >> Peter Guthrie Tait Road >> Edinburgh >> EH9 3FD >> T: +44(0)131 651 3465 >> E: dholmes(a)epcc.ed.ac.uk >> >> *Please consider the environment before printing this email.* >> >> >> The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in >> Scotland, with registration number SC005336. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> mpiwg-hybridpm mailing list >> mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-hybridpm > >_______________________________________________ >mpiwg-hybridpm mailing list >mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-hybridpm

1 0

Re: [mpiwg-hybridpm] mpiwg-hybridpm Digest, Vol 69, Issue 1
by Halim Amer 08 Feb '16

08 Feb '16

All, I have pushed my changes to pages 401-500. There are some instances that were not clear whether they required the change, so I am providing some notes below in addition to other questions. We could discuss this during today's meeting. 0. Shall we update the figures to reflect the change? We are the original raw figures? 1. I think ï¿½processesï¿½ is a generic term and should be left as it is in: P435: ï¿½We assume that systems have a public memory region that is addressable by all processes.ï¿½ P436: ï¿½This communication paradigm is closest to a shared memory model, where shared data can be accessed by all processes, irrespective of location.ï¿½ 2. In this sentence, the coarse-grained locks refer to the MPI window locks, right? I left it as it is, but it might have to change into ï¿½MPI window locksï¿½ P439: ï¿½RMA does not define fine-grained mutexes in memory (only logical coarse-grained process locks)ï¿½ 3. Several instances of the expression ï¿½process memoryï¿½ in the semantics and correctness section were not preceded by origin, target, or other terms that define them (P453~). When prefixing the expression with ï¿½MPIï¿½, the expression does not read well. I added ï¿½anï¿½ to identify an arbitrary MPI process, which seems correct in those contexts, but I think it needs to be reviewed carefully. 4. I think multi-process can be left as it is in (P458): ï¿½In the RMA unified model, although the public and private copies of the windows are synchronized, caution must be used when combining load/stores and multi-process synchronization.ï¿½ I am not sure if it makes sense to change it into multi-endpoint later though. 5. I changed in several examples ï¿½Process A/B/0/1ï¿½ into ï¿½MPI process A/B/0/1ï¿½, though am not sure it is necessary. 6. I think it is better to add the term MPI here, but we might consider removing the term thread because it is superfluous (P479): ï¿½A call to MPI_GREQUEST_COMPLETE may unblock a blocked user process/thread.ï¿½ 7. Are we supposed to use MPI or \MPI? The threading-interface section already uses \MPI process all over the place Regards, --Halim www.mcs.anl.gov/~aamer On 2/6/16 11:00 AM, mpiwg-hybridpm-request(a)lists.mpi-forum.org wrote: > Send mpiwg-hybridpm mailing list submissions to > mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-hybridpm > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > mpiwg-hybridpm-request(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > mpiwg-hybridpm-owner(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of mpiwg-hybridpm digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Clarification of word 'process' (Daniel Holmes) > 2. Re: Clarification of word 'process' (Jeff Hammond) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2016 19:31:55 +0000 > From: Daniel Holmes <dholmes(a)epcc.ed.ac.uk> > To: Hybrid WG <mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org> > Subject: [mpiwg-hybridpm] Clarification of word 'process' > Message-ID: <56B4F8AB.7000508(a)epcc.ed.ac.uk> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed > > Hi all, > > I have just pushed a new branch into our mpiwg-hybrid git repo called > "hybrid-process-clarification". > It contains one commit: "Clarification of word 'process', pages 101-200". > I am anticipating that each person's changes can be recorded as a commit > with a similar message to aid identification. > > There are a few instances that need discussion - specifically, when the > new MPI_AINT arithmetic functions are talking about the scope of > validity for the resulting addresses should that be OS process or MPI > process? > > Cheers, > Dan. >

1 0

Re: [mpiwg-hybridpm] Clarification of word 'process'
by Balaji, Pavan 07 Feb '16

07 Feb '16

I've pushed the changes for pages 1-100 as well (plus the front matter before page 1). I have a bunch of notes on my changes that I'd like to discuss on the call tomorrow. -- Pavan > On Feb 5, 2016, at 1:31 PM, Daniel Holmes <dholmes(a)epcc.ed.ac.uk> wrote: > > Hi all, > > I have just pushed a new branch into our mpiwg-hybrid git repo called "hybrid-process-clarification". > It contains one commit: "Clarification of word 'process', pages 101-200". > I am anticipating that each person's changes can be recorded as a commit with a similar message to aid identification. > > There are a few instances that need discussion - specifically, when the new MPI_AINT arithmetic functions are talking about the scope of validity for the resulting addresses should that be OS process or MPI process? > > Cheers, > Dan. > > -- > Dan Holmes > Applications Consultant in HPC Research > EPCC, The University of Edinburgh > James Clerk Maxwell Building > The Kings Buildings > Peter Guthrie Tait Road > Edinburgh > EH9 3FD > T: +44(0)131 651 3465 > E: dholmes(a)epcc.ed.ac.uk > > *Please consider the environment before printing this email.* > > > The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in > Scotland, with registration number SC005336. > > _______________________________________________ > mpiwg-hybridpm mailing list > mpiwg-hybridpm(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-hybridpm

1 0