[Mpi-forum] Status of vendor MPI 3.0 RMA implementations

Jed Brown jedbrown at mcs.anl.gov
Mon Mar 24 08:33:48 CDT 2014

Dan Holmes <dholmes at epcc.ed.ac.uk> writes:
> What is the current status of MPI 3.0 RMA support in vendor implementations?
> Both MPICH and OpenMPI now claim full compliance. 

Does it count as "full compliance" if there are open bugs that prevent
large parts of the standard from being used?


The claim in 1905 is that memory corruption is experienced only if the
datatype description does not fit within the eager limit, though I
provided a test case in which an indexed block of size 1 fails.
These two bugs are still present in trunk:


It seems a stretch to claim "full" MPI-3 compliance when a major
component of MPI-2 RMA still does not work.  The user doesn't care
whether it is called "bug" or "incomplete implementation"; they can't
use the feature either way, though they might waste more time trying
when it is called a "bug".

Perhaps a test suite should be gathered so that we can start to automate
checking for implementation bugs/incomplete implementations.  Bugs
encountered in vendor implementations have been huge time sinks for a
number of colleagues and for myself.  This includes deadlock in
MPI_Bcast and MPI_Comm_split, within the past year.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 835 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.mpi-forum.org/pipermail/mpi-forum/attachments/20140324/33302d01/attachment-0001.pgp>

More information about the mpi-forum mailing list