May 2014 - mpiwg-tools - mailman3.cels.anl.gov

Re: [mpiwg-tools] Profiling for MPI_SIZEOF?
by Marc-Andre Hermanns 15 May '14

15 May '14

Hi Jeff, isn't MPI_SIZEOF also named as a function that is allowed to be implemented as a macro? Also, the call is likely to be so short (in duration) that you'd have a huge overhead in intercepting it. I would also be ok with proposed solution #1. Cheers, Marc-Andre On 15.05.14 20:42, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) wrote: > Question for the Fortran and Tools WGs: How does a tool intercept calls to the Fortran-only MPI_SIZEOF function? (MPI-3.0 p621) > > I ask for the following reasons: > > 1. Unlike all other MPI functions, this function is keyed off the *type* of the 1st argument (not the *value* of the first argument). > > 2. Without support for TYPE(*), DIMENSION(..) (which no compiler supports yet), an MPI implementation has to provide N overloaded versions of MPI_SIZEOF to be able to determine the type of the first argument. > > 3. However, unlike how we specified the Fortran routine names in the MPI-3.0 errata so that they could be intercepted by PMPI, there are no specified specific subroutine names for the overloaded MPI_SIZEOF routines. > > In reality, I'm assuming no tool will ever care about intercepting MPI_SIZEOF (at least, they haven't complained in the several years that Open MPI/MPICH have provided it). But it's an inconsistency in the standard. > > I see two obvious solutions -- perhaps there are more: > > 1. Define that MPI_SIZEOF is not able to be profiled. > 2. For compilers that do not support TYPE(*), DIMENSION(..), define some kind of pattern of specific procedure names for the overloaded instances of MPI_SIZEOF. > > I'm in favor of #1. > > Thoughts? > -- Marc-Andre Hermanns Jülich Aachen Research Alliance, High Performance Computing (JARA-HPC) German Research School for Simulation Sciences GmbH Schinkelstrasse 2 52062 Aachen Germany Phone: +49 241 80 99753 Fax: +49 241 80 6 99753 www.grs-sim.de/parallel email: m.a.hermanns(a)grs-sim.de

1 0

Profiling for MPI_SIZEOF?
by Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) 15 May '14

15 May '14

Question for the Fortran and Tools WGs: How does a tool intercept calls to the Fortran-only MPI_SIZEOF function? (MPI-3.0 p621) I ask for the following reasons: 1. Unlike all other MPI functions, this function is keyed off the *type* of the 1st argument (not the *value* of the first argument). 2. Without support for TYPE(*), DIMENSION(..) (which no compiler supports yet), an MPI implementation has to provide N overloaded versions of MPI_SIZEOF to be able to determine the type of the first argument. 3. However, unlike how we specified the Fortran routine names in the MPI-3.0 errata so that they could be intercepted by PMPI, there are no specified specific subroutine names for the overloaded MPI_SIZEOF routines. In reality, I'm assuming no tool will ever care about intercepting MPI_SIZEOF (at least, they haven't complained in the several years that Open MPI/MPICH have provided it). But it's an inconsistency in the standard. I see two obvious solutions -- perhaps there are more: 1. Define that MPI_SIZEOF is not able to be profiled. 2. For compilers that do not support TYPE(*), DIMENSION(..), define some kind of pattern of specific procedure names for the overloaded instances of MPI_SIZEOF. I'm in favor of #1. Thoughts? -- Jeff Squyres jsquyres(a)cisco.com For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/

1 0

Re: [mpiwg-tools] Meeting reminder for tomorrow May 14
by Wesley Bland 14 May '14

14 May '14

Thanks for allowing us to join your call this week. We appreciate getting your feedback on the impact of FT on the tools chapter. There have only been minor changes to the text since the last reading (mostly related to RMA), but the newest version of the text can be found on the ticket: https://svn.mpi-forum.org/trac/mpi-forum-web/ticket/323. Thanks, Wesley On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 1:29 PM, Kathryn Mohror <kathryn(a)llnl.gov> wrote: > Hi all, > > This is a reminder of our bi-weekly phone call tomorrow at 8 AM PDT, 11 > AM EDT. > > The agenda will cover MPI_T related topics in preparation for votes at > the June meeting: > > - How does the MPI FT interface affect the tools interface? Members > of the FT Working Group will join to discuss this with us. > - Text for the “variables with same name must have same meaning” ticket > #383 > - Ticket #358 (new to us, proposed by Rolf) > > As always, the sign in information for the call is on the tools wiki: > https://svn.mpi-forum.org/trac/mpi-forum-web/wiki/MPI3Tools > > Talk to you soon! > Kathryn > _________________________________________________________________ > Kathryn Mohror, kathryn(a)llnl.gov, http://scalability.llnl.gov/ > Scalability Team @ Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA, > USA > > From: Kathryn Mohror <kathryn(a)llnl.gov> > Date: Thursday, May 8, 2014 at 8:04 AM > To: "mpiwg-tools(a)lists.mpi-forum.org" <mpiwg-tools(a)lists.mpi-forum.org> > Subject: Re: [mpiwg-tools] Next Telecon Heads Up > > Hi all, > > Sorry! It was not my intention to confuse anyone that the meeting was > today! I only thought that an early heads up would give people time to > arrange their schedules accordingly. > > Kathryn > > On May 8, 2014, at 8:02 AM, Michael Knobloch <m.knobloch(a)fz-juelich.de> > wrote: > > Hi Marc-Andre, > > the meeting is next week. I was confused too, so no blame on you. > > -Micha > > On 05/08/2014 04:05 PM, Marc-Andre Hermanns wrote: > > Hi Kathryn, > > I got delayed in another meeting, so I don't know if I can make it in > time for the our meeting today. I have to see if I can shuffle my > schedule a bit to still join. > > Please do not wait for me. If I can successfully shuffle I will be there > on time, if not, I won't be able to make it anyway. > > Cheers, > Marc-Andre > > On 07.05.14 21:05, John DelSignore wrote: > > Hi Kathryn, > > Unfortunately, last week my boss moved his staff meeting (every Thursday > at 11am ET) right on top of the MPI Tools concall time slot, so I'm not > sure how many of the MPI Tools calls I'll be able to make going forward. > For the handles work, we'll have to find another time. > > Cheers, John D. > > > Kathryn Mohror wrote: > > Hi all, > > For our call next week, instead of focusing on the debugger topics as > we had planned, we’ll go back to MPI_T topics in the interest of time > (meaning in time for voting at the next forum meeting). > > Topics > - How does the MPI FT interface affect the tools interface? Members > of the FT Working Group will join to discuss this with us. > - Text for the “variables with same name must have same meaning” > ticket #383 > > So, anyone who is only interested in debugger topics can skip next > time and we’ll come back to them next time. > > Kathryn > _________________________________________________________________ > Kathryn Mohror, kathryn(a)llnl.gov > <mailto:[email protected] <kathryn(a)llnl.gov>>, http://scalability.llnl.gov/ > Scalability Team @ Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, > CA, USA > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > mpiwg-tools mailing list > mpiwg-tools(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-tools > > > > > _______________________________________________ > mpiwg-tools mailing list > mpiwg-tools(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-tools > > > -- > Michael Knobloch > Institute for Advanced Simulation (IAS) > Jülich Supercomputing Centre (JSC) > Telefon: +49 2461 61-3546 > Telefax: +49 2461 61-6656 > E-Mail: m.knobloch(a)fz-juelich.de > Internet: http://www.fz-juelich.de/jsc > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Forschungszentrum Juelich GmbH > 52425 Juelich > Sitz der Gesellschaft: Juelich > Eingetragen im Handelsregister des Amtsgerichts Dueren Nr. HR B 3498 > Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: MinDir Dr. Karl Eugen Huthmacher > Geschaeftsfuehrung: Prof. Dr. Achim Bachem (Vorsitzender), > Karsten Beneke (stellv. Vorsitzender), Prof. Dr.-Ing. Harald Bolt, > Prof. Dr. Sebastian M. Schmidt > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > mpiwg-tools mailing list > mpiwg-tools(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-tools > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Kathryn Mohror, kathryn(a)llnl.gov, http://scalability.llnl.gov/ > Scalability Team @ Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA, > USA > > > > > > > > >

1 0

Meeting reminder for tomorrow May 14
by Kathryn Mohror 14 May '14

14 May '14

Hi all, This is a reminder of our bi-weekly phone call tomorrow at 8 AM PDT, 11 AM EDT. The agenda will cover MPI_T related topics in preparation for votes at the June meeting: - How does the MPI FT interface affect the tools interface? Members of the FT Working Group will join to discuss this with us. - Text for the ³variables with same name must have same meaning² ticket #383 - Ticket #358 (new to us, proposed by Rolf) As always, the sign in information for the call is on the tools wiki: https://svn.mpi-forum.org/trac/mpi-forum-web/wiki/MPI3Tools Talk to you soon! Kathryn _________________________________________________________________ Kathryn Mohror, kathryn(a)llnl.gov, http://scalability.llnl.gov/ Scalability Team @ Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA, USA From: Kathryn Mohror <kathryn(a)llnl.gov> Date: Thursday, May 8, 2014 at 8:04 AM To: "mpiwg-tools(a)lists.mpi-forum.org" <mpiwg-tools(a)lists.mpi-forum.org> Subject: Re: [mpiwg-tools] Next Telecon Heads Up Hi all, Sorry! It was not my intention to confuse anyone that the meeting was today! I only thought that an early heads up would give people time to arrange their schedules accordingly. Kathryn On May 8, 2014, at 8:02 AM, Michael Knobloch <m.knobloch(a)fz-juelich.de> wrote: > Hi Marc-Andre, > > the meeting is next week. I was confused too, so no blame on you. > > -Micha > > On 05/08/2014 04:05 PM, Marc-Andre Hermanns wrote: >> Hi Kathryn, >> >> I got delayed in another meeting, so I don't know if I can make it in >> time for the our meeting today. I have to see if I can shuffle my >> schedule a bit to still join. >> >> Please do not wait for me. If I can successfully shuffle I will be there >> on time, if not, I won't be able to make it anyway. >> >> Cheers, >> Marc-Andre >> >> On 07.05.14 21:05, John DelSignore wrote: >>> Hi Kathryn, >>> >>> Unfortunately, last week my boss moved his staff meeting (every Thursday >>> at 11am ET) right on top of the MPI Tools concall time slot, so I'm not >>> sure how many of the MPI Tools calls I'll be able to make going forward. >>> For the handles work, we'll have to find another time. >>> >>> Cheers, John D. >>> >>> >>> Kathryn Mohror wrote: >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> For our call next week, instead of focusing on the debugger topics as >>>> we had planned, we¹ll go back to MPI_T topics in the interest of time >>>> (meaning in time for voting at the next forum meeting). >>>> >>>> Topics >>>> - How does the MPI FT interface affect the tools interface? Members >>>> of the FT Working Group will join to discuss this with us. >>>> - Text for the ³variables with same name must have same meaning² >>>> ticket #383 >>>> >>>> So, anyone who is only interested in debugger topics can skip next >>>> time and we¹ll come back to them next time. >>>> >>>> Kathryn >>>> _________________________________________________________________ >>>> Kathryn Mohror, kathryn(a)llnl.gov >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>, http://scalability.llnl.gov/ >>>> Scalability Team @ Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, >>>> CA, USA >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> mpiwg-tools mailing list >>> mpiwg-tools(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >>> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-tools >>> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> mpiwg-tools mailing list >> mpiwg-tools(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-tools >> > > -- > Michael Knobloch > Institute for Advanced Simulation (IAS) > Jülich Supercomputing Centre (JSC) > Telefon: +49 2461 61-3546 > Telefax: +49 2461 61-6656 > E-Mail: m.knobloch(a)fz-juelich.de > Internet: http://www.fz-juelich.de/jsc > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ------------------ > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ------------------ > Forschungszentrum Juelich GmbH > 52425 Juelich > Sitz der Gesellschaft: Juelich > Eingetragen im Handelsregister des Amtsgerichts Dueren Nr. HR B 3498 > Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: MinDir Dr. Karl Eugen Huthmacher > Geschaeftsfuehrung: Prof. Dr. Achim Bachem (Vorsitzender), > Karsten Beneke (stellv. Vorsitzender), Prof. Dr.-Ing. Harald Bolt, > Prof. Dr. Sebastian M. Schmidt > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ------------------ > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > mpiwg-tools mailing list > mpiwg-tools(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-tools _________________________________________________________________ Kathryn Mohror, kathryn(a)llnl.gov, http://scalability.llnl.gov/ Scalability Team @ Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA, USA

1 0

Re: [mpiwg-tools] working group depository
by Kathryn Mohror 13 May '14

13 May '14

> >> I would suggest making the first sentence include enumerations and >>categories: >> >> Enumerations, variables, and categories with the same name in connected > >I thought about that. But then you get into an ambiguity: is that >sentence saying that if an enumeration and a variable have the same name, >they must obey the same semantics (which wouldn't make sense)? > >Hence, I just listed variables first, and then said "the others also must >obey these semantics...". Ah, I see what you were doing there. It makes sense now. > >...although I see that my sentence after the itemized list induces this >same ambiguity. Drat. See below. > >> We also might need to explicitly state the full names of the GET_INFO >>routines instead of using a star. > >That was exactly what I was trying *not* to do, because then you get in >the game of a) listing all the function names, and b) matching them to >their respective word ("enumerations", "variables", and "categories"). I wasn¹t sure if ³standardeze² allowed for wildcards which is why I said that. I think it¹s clear, but wasn¹t sure if it was formal enough. The only place I see wildcard notation is in the tools chapter table of constants and in 6.1 for MPI_Comm_* > >> Do you intend to keep the table we made of the parameters? > >I did not intend to, no. AFTER I WORKED SO HARD ON IT? :-) > >Slightly new suggestion: > >----- >Variables with the same name in connected processes are required to: > >* Adhere to the same definition from the MPI implementation >* Exhibit the same behavioral semantics >* Return the same INOUT and OUT values from the relevant > MPI_T_*_GET_INFO function, with the exception that OUT index values > may differ between different processes > >Similarly, enumerations and categories in connected processes must also >obey the above restrictions. > >Advice to implementors. The intent of these requirements is to enforce >consistent meanings of variables, categories, and enumerations across >connected processes. For example, variables describing the number of >packets sent across different network device types should have different >names to reflect their potentially different meanings. (End of advice to >implementors.) >----- I¹m good with this. The only thing I think is weird is the wildcard in the last bullet there, because there is only one relevant GET_INFO routine for variables. It makes sense after I read the next sentence I suppose, but not before. Of course, now that I say that, when I¹m reading this I don¹t necessarily know there is only one GET_INFO routine for variables because I haven¹t gotten to that part yet Kathryn > >-- >Jeff Squyres >jsquyres(a)cisco.com >For corporate legal information go to: >http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/ > >_______________________________________________ >mpiwg-tools mailing list >mpiwg-tools(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-tools

1 0

Re: [mpiwg-tools] working group depository
by Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) 12 May '14

12 May '14

On May 12, 2014, at 1:50 PM, Kathryn Mohror <kathryn(a)llnl.gov> wrote: > I would suggest making the first sentence include enumerations and categories: > > Enumerations, variables, and categories with the same name in connected… I thought about that. But then you get into an ambiguity: is that sentence saying that if an enumeration and a variable have the same name, they must obey the same semantics (which wouldn't make sense)? Hence, I just listed variables first, and then said "the others also must obey these semantics...". ...although I see that my sentence after the itemized list induces this same ambiguity. Drat. See below. > We also might need to explicitly state the full names of the GET_INFO routines instead of using a star. That was exactly what I was trying *not* to do, because then you get in the game of a) listing all the function names, and b) matching them to their respective word ("enumerations", "variables", and "categories"). > Do you intend to keep the table we made of the parameters? I did not intend to, no. Slightly new suggestion: ----- Variables with the same name in connected processes are required to: * Adhere to the same definition from the MPI implementation * Exhibit the same behavioral semantics * Return the same INOUT and OUT values from the relevant MPI_T_*_GET_INFO function, with the exception that OUT index values may differ between different processes Similarly, enumerations and categories in connected processes must also obey the above restrictions. Advice to implementors. The intent of these requirements is to enforce consistent meanings of variables, categories, and enumerations across connected processes. For example, variables describing the number of packets sent across different network device types should have different names to reflect their potentially different meanings. (End of advice to implementors.) ----- -- Jeff Squyres jsquyres(a)cisco.com For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/

1 0

Re: [mpiwg-tools] working group depository
by Kathryn Mohror 12 May '14

12 May '14

I would suggest making the first sentence include enumerations and categories: Enumerations, variables, and categories with the same name in connected… We also might need to explicitly state the full names of the GET_INFO routines instead of using a star. Do you intend to keep the table we made of the parameters? Kathryn On Apr 17, 2014, at 3:38 PM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) <jsquyres(a)cisco.com> wrote: > How's this for a new suggestion: > > ----- > Variables with the same name in connected processes are required to: > > * Adhere to the same definition from the MPI implementation > * Exhibit the same behavioral semantics > * Return the same INOUT and OUT values from the relevant > MPI_T_*_GET_INFO function, with the exception that OUT index values > may differ between different processes > > Similarly, enumerations and categories with the same name in connected > processes must also obey the above restrictions, > > Advice to implementors. The intent of these requirements is to enforce > consistent meanings of variables, categories, and enumerations > across connected processes. For example, variables describing the > number of packets sent across different network device types should > have different names to reflect their potentially different > meanings. (End of advice to implementors.) > ----- > > > On Apr 17, 2014, at 1:35 PM, Kathryn Mohror <kathryn(a)llnl.gov> wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> For anyone who wanted to muck with the text for ticket 383, I put the document into the tools working group repository (trunk/working-groups/mpi-3/tools/MPI-3.1-toolsWG). >> >> Kathryn >> _________________________________________________________________ >> Kathryn Mohror, kathryn(a)llnl.gov, http://scalability.llnl.gov/ >> Scalability Team @ Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA, USA >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> mpiwg-tools mailing list >> mpiwg-tools(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-tools > > > -- > Jeff Squyres > jsquyres(a)cisco.com > For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/ > > _______________________________________________ > mpiwg-tools mailing list > mpiwg-tools(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-tools _________________________________________________________________ Kathryn Mohror, kathryn(a)llnl.gov, http://scalability.llnl.gov/ Scalability Team @ Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA, USA

1 0

Re: [mpiwg-tools] Next Telecon Heads Up
by Kathryn Mohror 08 May '14

08 May '14

Hi all, Sorry! It was not my intention to confuse anyone that the meeting was today! I only thought that an early heads up would give people time to arrange their schedules accordingly. Kathryn On May 8, 2014, at 8:02 AM, Michael Knobloch <m.knobloch(a)fz-juelich.de> wrote: > Hi Marc-Andre, > > the meeting is next week. I was confused too, so no blame on you. > > -Micha > > On 05/08/2014 04:05 PM, Marc-Andre Hermanns wrote: >> Hi Kathryn, >> >> I got delayed in another meeting, so I don't know if I can make it in >> time for the our meeting today. I have to see if I can shuffle my >> schedule a bit to still join. >> >> Please do not wait for me. If I can successfully shuffle I will be there >> on time, if not, I won't be able to make it anyway. >> >> Cheers, >> Marc-Andre >> >> On 07.05.14 21:05, John DelSignore wrote: >>> Hi Kathryn, >>> >>> Unfortunately, last week my boss moved his staff meeting (every Thursday >>> at 11am ET) right on top of the MPI Tools concall time slot, so I'm not >>> sure how many of the MPI Tools calls I'll be able to make going forward. >>> For the handles work, we'll have to find another time. >>> >>> Cheers, John D. >>> >>> >>> Kathryn Mohror wrote: >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> For our call next week, instead of focusing on the debugger topics as >>>> we had planned, we’ll go back to MPI_T topics in the interest of time >>>> (meaning in time for voting at the next forum meeting). >>>> >>>> Topics >>>> - How does the MPI FT interface affect the tools interface? Members >>>> of the FT Working Group will join to discuss this with us. >>>> - Text for the “variables with same name must have same meaning” >>>> ticket #383 >>>> >>>> So, anyone who is only interested in debugger topics can skip next >>>> time and we’ll come back to them next time. >>>> >>>> Kathryn >>>> _________________________________________________________________ >>>> Kathryn Mohror, kathryn(a)llnl.gov >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>, http://scalability.llnl.gov/ >>>> Scalability Team @ Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, >>>> CA, USA >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> mpiwg-tools mailing list >>> mpiwg-tools(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >>> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-tools >>> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> mpiwg-tools mailing list >> mpiwg-tools(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-tools >> > > -- > Michael Knobloch > Institute for Advanced Simulation (IAS) > Jülich Supercomputing Centre (JSC) > Telefon: +49 2461 61-3546 > Telefax: +49 2461 61-6656 > E-Mail: m.knobloch(a)fz-juelich.de > Internet: http://www.fz-juelich.de/jsc > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Forschungszentrum Juelich GmbH > 52425 Juelich > Sitz der Gesellschaft: Juelich > Eingetragen im Handelsregister des Amtsgerichts Dueren Nr. HR B 3498 > Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: MinDir Dr. Karl Eugen Huthmacher > Geschaeftsfuehrung: Prof. Dr. Achim Bachem (Vorsitzender), > Karsten Beneke (stellv. Vorsitzender), Prof. Dr.-Ing. Harald Bolt, > Prof. Dr. Sebastian M. Schmidt > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > mpiwg-tools mailing list > mpiwg-tools(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-tools _________________________________________________________________ Kathryn Mohror, kathryn(a)llnl.gov, http://scalability.llnl.gov/ Scalability Team @ Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA, USA

1 0

Re: [mpiwg-tools] Next Telecon Heads Up
by Marc-Andre Hermanns 08 May '14

08 May '14

Hi Kathryn, totally read over the "next week". It may still collide with another meeting, but I'll keep you posted on whether I can join. Cheers, Marc-Andre On 08.05.14 16:05, Marc-Andre Hermanns wrote: > Hi Kathryn, > > I got delayed in another meeting, so I don't know if I can make it in > time for the our meeting today. I have to see if I can shuffle my > schedule a bit to still join. > > Please do not wait for me. If I can successfully shuffle I will be there > on time, if not, I won't be able to make it anyway. > > Cheers, > Marc-Andre > > On 07.05.14 21:05, John DelSignore wrote: >> Hi Kathryn, >> >> Unfortunately, last week my boss moved his staff meeting (every Thursday >> at 11am ET) right on top of the MPI Tools concall time slot, so I'm not >> sure how many of the MPI Tools calls I'll be able to make going forward. >> For the handles work, we'll have to find another time. >> >> Cheers, John D. >> >> >> Kathryn Mohror wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> For our call next week, instead of focusing on the debugger topics as >>> we had planned, we’ll go back to MPI_T topics in the interest of time >>> (meaning in time for voting at the next forum meeting). >>> >>> Topics >>> - How does the MPI FT interface affect the tools interface? Members >>> of the FT Working Group will join to discuss this with us. >>> - Text for the “variables with same name must have same meaning” >>> ticket #383 >>> >>> So, anyone who is only interested in debugger topics can skip next >>> time and we’ll come back to them next time. >>> >>> Kathryn >>> _________________________________________________________________ >>> Kathryn Mohror, kathryn(a)llnl.gov >>> <mailto:[email protected]>, http://scalability.llnl.gov/ >>> Scalability Team @ Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, >>> CA, USA >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> mpiwg-tools mailing list >> mpiwg-tools(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-tools >> > -- Marc-Andre Hermanns Jülich Aachen Research Alliance, High Performance Computing (JARA-HPC) German Research School for Simulation Sciences GmbH Schinkelstrasse 2 52062 Aachen Germany Phone: +49 241 80 99753 Fax: +49 241 80 6 99753 www.grs-sim.de/parallel email: m.a.hermanns(a)grs-sim.de

1 0

Re: [mpiwg-tools] Next Telecon Heads Up
by Michael Knobloch 08 May '14

08 May '14

Hi Marc-Andre, the meeting is next week. I was confused too, so no blame on you. -Micha On 05/08/2014 04:05 PM, Marc-Andre Hermanns wrote: > Hi Kathryn, > > I got delayed in another meeting, so I don't know if I can make it in > time for the our meeting today. I have to see if I can shuffle my > schedule a bit to still join. > > Please do not wait for me. If I can successfully shuffle I will be there > on time, if not, I won't be able to make it anyway. > > Cheers, > Marc-Andre > > On 07.05.14 21:05, John DelSignore wrote: >> Hi Kathryn, >> >> Unfortunately, last week my boss moved his staff meeting (every Thursday >> at 11am ET) right on top of the MPI Tools concall time slot, so I'm not >> sure how many of the MPI Tools calls I'll be able to make going forward. >> For the handles work, we'll have to find another time. >> >> Cheers, John D. >> >> >> Kathryn Mohror wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> For our call next week, instead of focusing on the debugger topics as >>> we had planned, we’ll go back to MPI_T topics in the interest of time >>> (meaning in time for voting at the next forum meeting). >>> >>> Topics >>> - How does the MPI FT interface affect the tools interface? Members >>> of the FT Working Group will join to discuss this with us. >>> - Text for the “variables with same name must have same meaning” >>> ticket #383 >>> >>> So, anyone who is only interested in debugger topics can skip next >>> time and we’ll come back to them next time. >>> >>> Kathryn >>> _________________________________________________________________ >>> Kathryn Mohror, kathryn(a)llnl.gov >>> <mailto:[email protected]>, http://scalability.llnl.gov/ >>> Scalability Team @ Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, >>> CA, USA >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> mpiwg-tools mailing list >> mpiwg-tools(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-tools >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > mpiwg-tools mailing list > mpiwg-tools(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-tools > -- Michael Knobloch Institute for Advanced Simulation (IAS) Jülich Supercomputing Centre (JSC) Telefon: +49 2461 61-3546 Telefax: +49 2461 61-6656 E-Mail: m.knobloch(a)fz-juelich.de Internet: http://www.fz-juelich.de/jsc ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Forschungszentrum Juelich GmbH 52425 Juelich Sitz der Gesellschaft: Juelich Eingetragen im Handelsregister des Amtsgerichts Dueren Nr. HR B 3498 Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: MinDir Dr. Karl Eugen Huthmacher Geschaeftsfuehrung: Prof. Dr. Achim Bachem (Vorsitzender), Karsten Beneke (stellv. Vorsitzender), Prof. Dr.-Ing. Harald Bolt, Prof. Dr. Sebastian M. Schmidt ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0