[Mpi-forum] Merged Nonblocking Collectives into MPI-3 - Please Review!

[Torsten Hoefler]

Hi Rolf, all,
> I'm sorry that I could not attend the discussion at last meeting.
> Jeff's minutes are not yet available, therefore my opinion may
> be in contrary to votes at the meeting - then please tell me.
>
> My opinion after looking at ticket 254, file chap-coll/coll.tex :
>
> I strongly disagree with the current state of the latex source.
> You reinvented all the old MPI-2.2  markups, i.e., you uncleaned
> the tex source of exactly one file: coll.tex.
I did not reinvent them, I merged them from the MPI-2.2 document as we
agreed on the first vote for NBC. 

Let me re-state what we decided after Rajeev brought that point up right
before the first official vote on NBC last year. We decided to merge the
MPI-2.2 changes into the reviewed (and voted on) revision 6 of the NBC
document and then merge the document back to the main document. I
volunteered to do this.

And that's what I did, I used diff tools to merge the MPI-2.2 changes
into the NBC document and the merged that one back (I removed the
superfluous macros with diff tools). All changes (besided the
ireduce_scatter_block of course) were semi-automatic and less error
prone than manual changes.

> All MPI-2.2 markups are removed to allow the usage of Bills
> macros to mark all new MPI-3.0 changes.
> I could not find any \MPIupdate{3.0}... or similar markups
> in your new source.
>
> The 73 changes (found be grep'ing "htor") should be done
> into "current" coll.tex revision 253 and not into a very old revision.
Yes, I agree, but our defined method was different and also allowed for
semi-automatic merging.  

> There is no chance to do the cleaning again on your current
> unclean coll.tex revision 254!
I volunteer to do the cleanup of the final document with the same method
you used (pdftotext and diff) once we decided that the document is
complete.

> All these 73 changes should be marked with Bill's macros
> as ticket {3.0}{109}.
I decided to keep the MPI-2.2 macros in order to allow the reviewers to
(1) compare revision 6 of the NBC document with MPI-2.2 (see if all 2.2
changes are successfully merged) and compare MPI-2.2 with the MPI-3.0
draft to see if ticket #109 was merged successfully. It is necessary to
be able to compare all changes relative to the voted-on NBC document
separately. Thus, the MPI-2.2 changes are in the original colors and the
MPI-3 changes are b/w. All macros can be removed with pdftotext
checking.

> If the forum decided to step back to the uncleaned source
> then it should be done for all sources and not only
> for coll.tex.
No, we did not decide to do that and I will clean the document manually
once we decided to stick with the PDF. 

Not to reviewers: this whole discussion does *not* affect the pdf, it
only changes source-code and removal and changes of the macros will be
checked with pdftotext like Rolf's cleanup was done.

> Rich and Jeff, I cannot see any comments on ticket #203,
> nor any review from you.
> Did you discussed it at the Jan 2010 meeting?
Well, btw., as a general comment: we all knew that NBC was coming and
that the voted-on chapter based on MPI-2.1. So it was clear that the
cleanup would cause a major pain for the merge before it was started. It
would have been better to hold it back until the NBC was merged in :).
But I guess we don't have a similar situation in the future.

I just talked to Rolf on the phone and we agreed that I will do the
manual cleanup of chapter 5. Again, this will not change the non-markup
PDF at all and so any reviews that we can get before the March meeting
would be very helpful.

Thanks & All the Best,
  Torsten

-- 
 bash$ :(){ :|:&};: --------------------- http://www.unixer.de/ -----
Torsten Hoefler         | Research Associate
Blue Waters Directorate | University of Illinois
1205 W Clark Street     | Urbana, IL, 61801
NCSA Building           | +01 (217) 244-7736