[mpi-22] FW: [mpi-21] Proposal: MPI_OFFSET built-in type

[Rajeev Thakur]

 > Unfortunately, introducing new types would/could have large 
> consequences for the interface...

Will it change the interface much? It just adds to the list of predefined
types.

Rajeev

> -----Original Message-----
> From: mpi-22-bounces_at_[hidden] 
> [mailto:mpi-22-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Jesper Larsson Traeff
> Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 7:48 AM
> To: Discussion of MPI Standard version 2.2
> Subject: Re: [mpi-22] FW: [mpi-21] Proposal: MPI_OFFSET built-in type
> 
> On Thu, Jan 24, 2008 at 11:18:52AM -0600, Rajeev Thakur wrote:
> > A similar one is needed for MPI_Aint.
> >
> yes, it is needed... but maybe it was really not intended in 
> MPI-1 that 
> addresses be sent around, and therefore there was no MPI_AINT? 
> 
> A cleaner (overly puristic?) solution would be to introduce 
> more types 
> with MPI types only for those really intended to be 
> communicable, e.g. 
> MPI_COUNT (MPI type for new MPI_Count type), MPI_OFFSET (for 
> MPI_Offset), ... 
> Unfortunately, introducing new types would/could have large 
> consequences 
> for the interface...
> 
> Related concerns for MPI-3.0 discussion: can MPI_Op's be sent (useful
> when writing MPI correctness checking software)? can MPI_Datatypes be
> sent (currently not - but would be very useful in combination 
> with more 
> functionality for manipulating datatypes)?
> 
> Jesper
> 
> > Rajeev 
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: mpi-22-bounces_at_[hidden] 
> > > [mailto:mpi-22-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Richard Graham
> > > Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2008 11:09 AM
> > > To: mpi-22_at_[hidden]
> > > Subject: [mpi-22] FW: [mpi-21] Proposal: MPI_OFFSET built-in type
> > > 
> > > Moving this to the appropriate list.
> > > 
> > > Rich
> > > 
> > > ------ Forwarded Message
> > > From: Robert Latham <robl_at_[hidden]>
> > > Reply-To: "Mailing list for discussion of MPI 2.1" 
> > > <mpi-21_at_[hidden]>
> > > Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 10:41:52 -0600
> > > To: <mpi-21_at_[hidden]>
> > > Subject: [mpi-21] Proposal: MPI_OFFSET built-in type
> > > 
> > > I hope this is less contentious than adding 'const' keywords...
> > > 
> > > 
> > > I would like to propose a new built-in type MPI_OFFSET, 
> defined to be
> > > a type corresponding to INTEGER(KIND=MPI_OFFSET_KIND) or 
> MPI_Offset
> > > 
> > > This is a minor addition to the standard, which would 
> have no impact
> > > on existing code while serving to simplify code which 
> exchanges file
> > > offsets among processes.
> > > 
> > > There is a workaround in the standard: a user can define 
> a type from
> > > MPI_BYTE:
> > > 
> > >  MPI_Type_contiguous(sizeof(MPI_Offset), MPI_BYTE, &offtype);
> > > 
> > > However, it would clearly be more convienient to operate 
> on built-in
> > > types.  
> > > 
> > > MPI Datatype: MPI_OFFSET
> > > Corresponding C type: long long int
> > > Corresponding Fortran type: INTEGER(KIND=MPI_OFFSET_KIND)
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Thanks
> > > ==rob
> > > 
> > > -- 
> > > Rob Latham
> > > Mathematics and Computer Science Division    A215 0178 
> EA2D B059 8CDF
> > > Argonne National Lab, IL USA                 B29D F333 
> 664A 4280 315B
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > mpi-21 mailing list
> > > mpi-21_at_[hidden]
> > > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/mpi-21
> > > 
> > > ------ End of Forwarded Message
> > > 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > mpi-22 mailing list
> > > mpi-22_at_[hidden]
> > > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/mpi-22
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > mpi-22 mailing list
> > mpi-22_at_[hidden]
> > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/mpi-22
> _______________________________________________
> mpi-22 mailing list
> mpi-22_at_[hidden]
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/mpi-22
> 
>