Pushing to Thursday 26 Sep works for me. Sorry for the schedule complications!
On Sep 17, 2019, at 8:37 AM, Mohror, Kathryn <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Marc-Andre,
Pushing to a later Thursday is fine with me. I am not aware of any other tools people that are planning to join this coming Thursday.
Kathryn
-----Original Message----- From: mpiwg-tools <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Marc-André Hermanns via mpiwg-tools Sent: Monday, September 16, 2019 11:46 PM To: Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) <[email protected]>; MPI Tool WG <[email protected]>; William Williams <[email protected]> Cc: Marc-André Hermanns <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [mpiwg-tools] Questions for the tools community
Hi Jeff,
sorry for the delay in responding to your email.
As Martin also has some conflicts for this upcoming Thursday, we had the idea to push this to another week. How would that work for you?
@Kathryn: Do you know from anyone at LLNL or other US sites who planned to come, who we need to inform if we shift to another week? I put Bill Williams (from TU Dresden) in CC, as he initially planned to join as well.
If shifting the topic to a later date doesn't work out for you, you can certainly sync up with me, but I think first-hand information is always best in a discussion and it's always a pleasure to have you on the call ;-)
Cheers, Marc-Andre
On 16.09.19 15:05, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) wrote:
Something changed and I'm sorry, I can't be there this Thursday. I'm sorry!
Can I sync up with someone before Thursday to explain what I'm asking about?
On Aug 29, 2019, at 11:25 AM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) <[email protected]> wrote:
Sure, I can be there.
Thanks!
On Aug 29, 2019, at 11:05 AM, Marc-André Hermanns via mpiwg-tools <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Jeff,
sorry about the silence. As Martin already said, your mail led to some internal discussion and we wanted to reach out beyond the tools people on the mailing list because it seems no-one on the list is currently able to handle Fortran descriptors, but we failed to keep you informed.
Would you be available on *Sep 19* for the tools call? That would give us some time to contact some people outside the working group and they'd have time to either give feedback or organize their schedules in a way to attend the call.
Cheers, Marc-Andre
On 29.08.19 16:53, Martin Schulz via mpiwg-tools wrote:
Hi Jeff,
Due to the summer break and vacation time, especially in Europe, we haven’t had a chance to address this - Marc-Andre had suggested a tools call on this for after EuroMPI and then we’ll know more (we need to get tool implementors to the table who are not part of the WG).
Personally, though, I fear you are right with your assumption, but I am happy to be proven wrong.
Martin
— Prof. Dr. Martin Schulz, Chair of Computer Architecture and Parallel Systems Department of Informatics, TU-Munich, Boltzmannstraße 3, D-85748 Garching Member of the Board of Directors at the Leibniz Supercomputing Centre (LRZ) Email: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
On 29. Aug 2019, at 16:46, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) via mpiwg-tools <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Should I infer from the lack of reply that no tools properly handle either Fortran descriptors or the descriptor-based symbols?
On Aug 25, 2019, at 11:31 AM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) via mpiwg-tools <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
In Open MPI, we are finally working towards supporting Fortran descriptors for choice buffers (i.e., "TYPE(*), DIMENSION(..)").
Per MPI-3.1 p613 table 17.1, this means ***changing all the back-end symbols*** that are used for PMPI-style interception.
A concrete example:
- in mpif.h / the mpi module, MPI_SEND will become MPI_SEND_FTS - in the mpi_f08 module, MPI_SEND will become MPI_SEND_F08TS
I.e., anywhere the application calls MPI_SEND, it will be transmogrified to either MPI_SEND_FTS or MPI_SEND_F08TS. And the choice buffer passed will be a descriptor (which may therefore be a subarray, not a contiguous buffer), not a naked pointer.
Here's my questions:
1. Do any tools support Fortran descriptors as choice buffers? 2. Do any tools intercept the symbols as described in MPI-3.1 table 17.1?
-- Jeff Squyres [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
_______________________________________________ mpiwg-tools mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo/mpiwg-tools
-- Jeff Squyres [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
_______________________________________________ mpiwg-tools mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo/mpiwg-tools
_______________________________________________ mpiwg-tools mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo/mpiwg-tools
-- Dr. rer. nat. Marc-André Hermanns
IT Center Group: High Performance Computing Division: Computational Science and Engineering RWTH Aachen University Seffenter Weg 23 52074 Aachen Phone: +49 241 80-24381 [email protected] www.itc.rwth-aachen.de
_______________________________________________ mpiwg-tools mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo/mpiwg-tools
-- Jeff Squyres [email protected]
-- Dr. rer. nat. Marc-André Hermanns
IT Center Group: High Performance Computing Division: Computational Science and Engineering RWTH Aachen University Seffenter Weg 23 52074 Aachen Phone: +49 241 80-24381 [email protected] www.itc.rwth-aachen.de
-- Jeff Squyres [email protected]