<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:x="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:excel" xmlns:p="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:powerpoint" xmlns:a="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:access" xmlns:dt="uuid:C2F41010-65B3-11d1-A29F-00AA00C14882" xmlns:s="uuid:BDC6E3F0-6DA3-11d1-A2A3-00AA00C14882" xmlns:rs="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:rowset" xmlns:z="#RowsetSchema" xmlns:b="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:publisher" xmlns:ss="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:spreadsheet" xmlns:c="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:component:spreadsheet" xmlns:odc="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:odc" xmlns:oa="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:activation" xmlns:html="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40" xmlns:q="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/" xmlns:D="DAV:" xmlns:x2="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/excel/2003/xml" xmlns:ois="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/ois/" xmlns:dir="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/directory/" xmlns:ds="http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#" xmlns:dsp="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/dsp" xmlns:udc="http://schemas.microsoft.com/data/udc" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" xmlns:sub="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/2002/1/alerts/" xmlns:ec="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmlenc#" xmlns:sp="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/" xmlns:sps="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:udcxf="http://schemas.microsoft.com/data/udc/xmlfile" xmlns:wf="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/workflow/" xmlns:mver="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/markup-compatibility/2006" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns:mrels="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/package/2006/relationships" xmlns:ex12t="http://schemas.microsoft.com/exchange/services/2006/types" xmlns:ex12m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/exchange/services/2006/messages" xmlns:Z="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:" xmlns:st="" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)">
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
tt
{mso-style-priority:99;
font-family:"Courier New";}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Thanks Dick,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Yes, it makes sense that the send buffer would still be
addressable by the sender process as the buffer might share the pages with other
memory allocations. (I assume that the mapping is done in page granularity).<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Thanks,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>.Erez<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>
mpi-22-bounces@lists.mpi-forum.org [mailto:mpi-22-bounces@lists.mpi-forum.org] <b>On
Behalf Of </b>Richard Treumann<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, December 08, 2008 1:56 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> MPI 2.2<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Mpi-22] please review - Send Buffer Access (ticket #45)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p>On a single OS under AIX, IBM MPI does map the portion of send side memory
that holds the send buffer into the receivers address space. We do this for
both contiguous and non-contiguous buffers. The mapping lasts just long enough
for the receive side CPU to do a memory copy from send buffer to receive
buffer. (see patent <b><span style='font-size:13.5pt'>7,392,256</span></b><span
style='font-size:13.5pt'>)</span><br>
<br>
This optimization does not have any effect on the addressability of the send
buffer by the sending task. In our case, at least, this optimization does not
argue against the proposal.<br>
<br>
Also, Robert and I had a chat about the byte swap trick and it seems it should
be both semantically cleaner and require fewer CPU cycles to do it in the
receive buffer. In the receive buffer there is no question that the application
must wait for the communication to complete and the swap only needs to be done
once (the message flows in with bytes in sender order and the MPI_Recv does one
pass of byte swaps if required. In the send buffer trick, the swaps to receiver
order must be done and then a second pass is needed to undo it)<br>
<br>
Dick <br>
<br>
Dick Treumann - MPI Team <br>
IBM Systems & Technology Group<br>
Dept X2ZA / MS P963 -- 2455 South Road -- Poughkeepsie, NY 12601<br>
Tele (845) 433-7846 Fax (845) 433-8363<br>
<br>
<br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>mpi-22-bounces@lists.mpi-forum.org wrote on
12/08/2008 04:11:45 PM:</span></tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:
"Courier New"'><br>
<br>
<tt>> [image removed] </tt></span><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><br>
<tt>> Re: [Mpi-22] please review - Send Buffer Access (ticket #45)</tt></span><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><br>
<tt>> Erez Haba </tt></span><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><br>
<tt>> to:</tt></span><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><br>
<tt>> MPI 2.2</tt></span><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><br>
<tt>> 12/08/2008 04:13 PM</tt></span><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><br>
<tt>> Sent by:</tt></span><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><br>
<tt>> mpi-22-bounces@lists.mpi-forum.org</tt></span><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><br>
<tt>> Please respond to "MPI 2.2"</tt></span><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><br>
<tt>> Dear Alexander,</tt></span><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> As far as I recall memory remapping
from the main processor to a </span></tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New"'><br>
<tt>> network device was discussed before (If I recall correctly, in the </tt><br>
<tt>> April meeting). I think that it’s close enough to your scenario of </tt><br>
<tt>> remapping to a different process for the purpose of this discussion.</tt></span><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Is your case real? Do you know of
systems that do that with MPI? Or </span></tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New"'><br>
<tt>> is it a hypothetical case?</tt></span><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> For the review process, we do need
people to review the text; we </span></tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New"'><br>
<tt>> added this requirement in the last meeting. Regardless, it does not </tt><br>
<tt>> prevent any other person from giving feedback on the proposal.
I’m </tt><br>
<tt>> sure that Jeff or Bill can give you’re a more formal definition of </tt><br>
<tt>> the review process.</tt></span><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> The wiki page state that:</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> <a
href="https://svn.mpi-forum.org/trac/mpi-forum-web/wiki/mpi22/TicketWorkflow">https://svn.mpi-forum.org/trac/mpi-forum-web/wiki/mpi22/TicketWorkflow</a></span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> To advance to the first reading, a
proposal must be reviewed by the </span></tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New"'><br>
<tt>> lead chapter author and three other reviewers. That review should </tt><br>
<tt>> check the change against the standard text to ensure that the change</tt><br>
<tt>> in context is correct; in addition, the change should be evaluated </tt><br>
<tt>> for completeness. For changes that involve multiple chapters (but </tt><br>
<tt>> are logically related and hence belong in a single ticket), the </tt><br>
<tt>> respective chapter authors must review the changes in their </tt><br>
<tt>> chapters. These reviews must be entered as comments on the ticket. </tt><br>
<tt>> MPI 2.2 Chapter Authors </tt></span><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> From:
mpi-22-bounces@lists.mpi-forum.org [<a href="mailto:mpi-22-">mailto:mpi-22-</a></span></tt><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><br>
<tt>> bounces@lists.mpi-forum.org] On Behalf Of Supalov, Alexander</tt><br>
<tt>> Sent: Saturday, December 06, 2008 11:44 AM</tt><br>
<tt>> To: MPI 2.2</tt><br>
<tt>> Subject: Re: [Mpi-22] please review - Send Buffer Access (ticket #45)</tt></span><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Dear Erez,</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Thank you. I agree to respectfully
disagree on this with you, for </span></tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New"'><br>
<tt>> the following two reasons:</tt></span><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> 1) The memory remapping scenario IO
brought up a couple of days ago </span></tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New"'><br>
<tt>> was not discussed before the first voting as far as I can recall. If</tt><br>
<tt>> you have proof to the contrary, I would most kindly ask you to </tt><br>
<tt>> present it. If this cannot be done, I would say that a new issue has</tt><br>
<tt>> been added to the discussion, and we may need to review its substance.</tt></span><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> 2) Next, I would like to see the
definition of the ticket review </span></tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New"'><br>
<tt>> process that states the reviewers are supposed to only check the </tt><br>
<tt>> proposed text for correspondence with the existing standard. My </tt><br>
<tt>> opinion is that reviewers are there to bring both textual and </tt><br>
<tt>> substantial concerns up when they see the need for this. So far I've</tt><br>
<tt>> been acting on this conviction.</tt></span><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> I'm looking forward to the further
discussion on the floor.</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Best regards.</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Alexander</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><br>
<tt>> From: mpi-22-bounces@lists.mpi-forum.org [<a href="mailto:mpi-22-">mailto:mpi-22-</a></tt><br>
<tt>> bounces@lists.mpi-forum.org] On Behalf Of Erez Haba</tt><br>
<tt>> Sent: Saturday, December 06, 2008 7:45 PM</tt><br>
<tt>> To: MPI 2.2</tt><br>
<tt>> Subject: Re: [Mpi-22] please review - Send Buffer Access (ticket #45)</tt></span><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Thanks Alexander,</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> I respectfully decline your proposal to
suspend the review of these tickets.</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> I don’t see any specific reference wrt
text in your comments; and </span></tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New"'><br>
<tt>> you don’t bring any new issue that has not been discussed before the
1st</tt><br>
<tt>> voting. Thus I don’t see any reason to suspend their review.</tt></span><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Thanks,</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> .Erez</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> From:
mpi-22-bounces@lists.mpi-forum.org [<a href="mailto:mpi-22-">mailto:mpi-22-</a></span></tt><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><br>
<tt>> bounces@lists.mpi-forum.org] On Behalf Of Supalov, Alexander</tt><br>
<tt>> Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 4:19 PM</tt><br>
<tt>> To: MPI 2.2</tt><br>
<tt>> Subject: Re: [Mpi-22] please review - Send Buffer Access (ticket #45)</tt></span><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Dear Erez,</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Thank you. I reviewed the text and
found that further polishing of </span></tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New"'><br>
<tt>> its textual aspects should be suspended until the substance is </tt><br>
<tt>> clarified. I put a comment to this effect into the ticket, as well </tt><br>
<tt>> as into the dependent ticket #46. In my opinion, both tickets are </tt><br>
<tt>> not yet ready to go into the standard and should go into another </tt><br>
<tt>> round of contemplation of their possible repercussions.</tt></span><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> In both cases presumed application
friendliness is traded for less </span></tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New"'><br>
<tt>> freedom of implementation. Application developers who disregard the </tt><br>
<tt>> standard now will most likely continue to do this in the future, </tt><br>
<tt>> possibly in some other way. Restricting the freedom of </tt><br>
<tt>> implementation to make their life easier does not seem to be an </tt><br>
<tt>> attractive proposition to me.</tt></span><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> If any of the issues identified so far,
or comparable issues we </span></tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:
"Courier New"'><br>
<tt>> cannot fathom at the moment, surface up in one of the future HPC </tt><br>
<tt>> platforms and hinder MPI adoption or transition to MPI-2.2 there, we</tt><br>
<tt>> will have done disservice both to the MPI standard and to the </tt><br>
<tt>> community. I hope this will bear on the minds of those who're going </tt><br>
<tt>> to vote on these two items at the meeting.</tt></span><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Best regards.</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Alexander</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><br>
<tt>> From: mpi-22-bounces@lists.mpi-forum.org [<a href="mailto:mpi-22-">mailto:mpi-22-</a></tt><br>
<tt>> bounces@lists.mpi-forum.org] On Behalf Of Erez Haba</tt><br>
<tt>> Sent: Saturday, December 06, 2008 12:28 AM</tt><br>
<tt>> To: MPI 2.2</tt><br>
<tt>> Subject: Re: [Mpi-22] please review - Send Buffer Access (ticket #45)</tt></span><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Dear Alexander,</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> It is okay and encouraged for people to
comment and argue on the </span></tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:
"Courier New"'><br>
<tt>> proposals. You can add your comments to the ticket arguing your </tt><br>
<tt>> important points. The forum then consider that various points
and </tt><br>
<tt>> vote on the proposal.</tt></span><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> However for the voting process we need
people to review the text and</span></tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New"'><br>
<tt>> confirm that it does not conflict with the standard and it is </tt><br>
<tt>> reasonable (from language pov) to be included in the standard.</tt></span><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> If we are willing to review the text
and state that it valid for the</span></tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New"'><br>
<tt>> standard, that would be great. If you have any comments on the text </tt><br>
<tt>> please send them to me.</tt></span><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Thanks,</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> .Erez</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> From:
mpi-22-bounces@lists.mpi-forum.org [<a href="mailto:mpi-22-">mailto:mpi-22-</a></span></tt><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><br>
<tt>> bounces@lists.mpi-forum.org] On Behalf Of Supalov, Alexander</tt><br>
<tt>> Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 2:26 PM</tt><br>
<tt>> To: MPI 2.2</tt><br>
<tt>> Subject: Re: [Mpi-22] please review - Send Buffer Access (ticket #45)</tt></span><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Dear Erez,</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Thank you. I'm afraid I would need to
have it explained in more </span></tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:
"Courier New"'><br>
<tt>> detail why review may not include arguments on the substance. If </tt><br>
<tt>> something in the proposal makes one think that the proposed matter </tt><br>
<tt>> may be detrimental to the MPI standard and its implementations, I </tt><br>
<tt>> consider it one's duty to point this out.</tt></span><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Following up on your reply: the
segfault situation you described </span></tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New"'><br>
<tt>> will make an MPI compliant program break. Thus, the implementation </tt><br>
<tt>> will have to keep the send buffer mapped into the sending process </tt><br>
<tt>> address space. This is a limitation on the MPI implementation that </tt><br>
<tt>> should be taken into account during the voting.</tt></span><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Another possibility that has been
pointed out earlier was that the </span></tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New"'><br>
<tt>> proposed change disallows byte swap and other send buffer </tt><br>
<tt>> conversions to be done in place. At least one historical MPI </tt><br>
<tt>> implementation was doing this to a great avail. Who knows what is </tt><br>
<tt>> going to happen in the future?</tt></span><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Best regards.</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Alexander</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><br>
<tt>> From: mpi-22-bounces@lists.mpi-forum.org [<a href="mailto:mpi-22-">mailto:mpi-22-</a></tt><br>
<tt>> bounces@lists.mpi-forum.org] On Behalf Of Erez Haba</tt><br>
<tt>> Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 11:18 PM</tt><br>
<tt>> To: MPI 2.2</tt><br>
<tt>> Subject: Re: [Mpi-22] please review - Send Buffer Access (ticket #45)</tt></span><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> I think that the idea is for the
reviewers to check the text for any</span></tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New"'><br>
<tt>> mistakes and compatibility with the existing text, rather than check</tt><br>
<tt>> for the validity of the proposal. The later as I recall is left for </tt><br>
<tt>> the MPI forum assembly.</tt></span><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> As for your question, I’m sure that you
can answer it yourself. J If</span></tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New"'><br>
<tt>> the memory is still also mapped to the original process (as with </tt><br>
<tt>> shared memory) that everything is fine. If the memory is removed </tt><br>
<tt>> from the original process, than the app will get an access-violation
fault.</tt></span><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> (if this system works on a page
boundary, to take this action it </span></tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New"'><br>
<tt>> needs to make sure that there are no other allocation on the same page)</tt></span><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Thanks,</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> .Erez</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> From:
mpi-22-bounces@lists.mpi-forum.org [<a href="mailto:mpi-22-">mailto:mpi-22-</a></span></tt><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><br>
<tt>> bounces@lists.mpi-forum.org] On Behalf Of Supalov, Alexander</tt><br>
<tt>> Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 2:05 PM</tt><br>
<tt>> To: MPI 2.2</tt><br>
<tt>> Subject: Re: [Mpi-22] please review - Send Buffer Access (ticket #45)</tt></span><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Hi,</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> I'd like to review this proposal. Let's
consider the following scenario:</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> - In the MPI_Isend, MPI maps the send
buffer into the address space </span></tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New"'><br>
<tt>> of the receiving process.</tt></span><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> - In the matching MPI_Recv, the
receiving process makes a copy of </span></tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New"'><br>
<tt>> the mapped send buffer into the receive buffer.</tt></span><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> - Once the copy is complete, the send
buffer is mapped back into the</span></tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New"'><br>
<tt>> sender address space during the wait/test call.</tt></span><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> What will happen one tries to access
the send buffer in between?</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Best regards.</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Alexander</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><br>
<tt>> From: mpi-22-bounces@lists.mpi-forum.org [<a href="mailto:mpi-22-">mailto:mpi-22-</a></tt><br>
<tt>> bounces@lists.mpi-forum.org] On Behalf Of Erez Haba</tt><br>
<tt>> Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 10:48 PM</tt><br>
<tt>> To: MPI 2.2</tt><br>
<tt>> Subject: [Mpi-22] please review - Send Buffer Access (ticket #45)</tt></span><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> This proposal has passed 1st voting and
needs reviewers. We need 3 volunteers</span></tt><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><br>
<tt>> to sign-off on this proposal, plus the 3 chapter authors to sign-off</tt><br>
<tt>> on the text.</tt></span><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> The Chapter Authors for</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Chapter 3: Point-to-Point Communication</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Chapter 5: Collective Communication</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Chapter 11: One-Sided Communication</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Please add a comment to the ticket
saying that you reviewed the </span></tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New"'><br>
<tt>> proposal, or please send me your comments.</tt></span><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Send Buffer Access: <a
href="https://svn.mpi-forum.org/trac/mpi-forum-web/ticket/45">https://svn.mpi-forum.org/trac/mpi-forum-web/ticket/45</a></span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Thanks,</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> .Erez</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Intel GmbH</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Dornacher Strasse 1</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> 85622 Feldkirchen/Muenchen Germany</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Sitz der Gesellschaft: Feldkirchen bei
Muenchen</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Geschaeftsfuehrer: Douglas Lusk, Peter
Gleissner, Hannes Schwaderer</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Registergericht: Muenchen HRB 47456
Ust.-IdNr.</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> VAT Registration No.: DE129385895</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Citibank Frankfurt (BLZ 502 109 00)
600119052</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> This e-mail and any attachments may
contain confidential material for</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> the sole use of the intended recipient(s).
Any review or distribution</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> by others is strictly prohibited. If
you are not the intended</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> recipient, please contact the sender
and delete all copies.</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Intel GmbH</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Dornacher Strasse 1</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> 85622 Feldkirchen/Muenchen Germany</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Sitz der Gesellschaft: Feldkirchen bei
Muenchen</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Geschaeftsfuehrer: Douglas Lusk, Peter
Gleissner, Hannes Schwaderer</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Registergericht: Muenchen HRB 47456
Ust.-IdNr.</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> VAT Registration No.: DE129385895</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Citibank Frankfurt (BLZ 502 109 00)
600119052</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> This e-mail and any attachments may
contain confidential material for</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> the sole use of the intended
recipient(s). Any review or distribution</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> by others is strictly prohibited. If
you are not the intended</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> recipient, please contact the sender
and delete all copies.</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Intel GmbH</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Dornacher Strasse 1</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> 85622 Feldkirchen/Muenchen Germany</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Sitz der Gesellschaft: Feldkirchen bei
Muenchen</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Geschaeftsfuehrer: Douglas Lusk, Peter
Gleissner, Hannes Schwaderer</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Registergericht: Muenchen HRB 47456
Ust.-IdNr.</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> VAT Registration No.: DE129385895</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Citibank Frankfurt (BLZ 502 109 00)
600119052</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> This e-mail and any attachments may
contain confidential material for</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> the sole use of the intended
recipient(s). Any review or distribution</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> by others is strictly prohibited. If
you are not the intended</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> recipient, please contact the sender
and delete all copies.</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Intel GmbH</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Dornacher Strasse 1</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> 85622 Feldkirchen/Muenchen Germany</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Sitz der Gesellschaft: Feldkirchen bei
Muenchen</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Geschaeftsfuehrer: Douglas Lusk, Peter
Gleissner, Hannes Schwaderer</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Registergericht: Muenchen HRB 47456
Ust.-IdNr.</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> VAT Registration No.: DE129385895</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> Citibank Frankfurt (BLZ 502 109 00)
600119052</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> </span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> This e-mail and any attachments may
contain confidential material for</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> the sole use of the intended
recipient(s). Any review or distribution</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> by others is strictly prohibited. If
you are not the intended</span></tt><br>
<tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>> recipient, please contact the sender
and delete all copies.</span></tt><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:
"Courier New"'><br>
<tt>> _______________________________________________</tt><br>
<tt>> mpi-22 mailing list</tt><br>
<tt>> mpi-22@lists.mpi-forum.org</tt><br>
<tt>> <a href="http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-22">http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-22</a></tt></span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>