[Mpi3-abi] Meeting notes from 10th March

Edric Ellis Edric.Ellis at [hidden]
Mon Mar 17 04:18:17 CDT 2008



I'm not sure how best to express this, but there are a couple of things
that occur to me that might be important:

1. The size of the handle types (cf. size of a pointer perhaps?)

2. should we add some sort of table describing the current situation as
to how applications pick up the value of e.g. MPI_COMM_WORLD? E.g.
MPICH2 uses "#define MPI_COMM_WORLD 0x44000000", so that value is burned
into the binary; whereas OpenMPI uses extern pointers - i.e.
ompi_mpi_comm_world is in the initialized data section of libmpi.so, and
the value resolved at (dynamic) link time. 

Cheers,

Edric.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: mpi3-abi-bounces_at_[hidden] [mailto:mpi3-abi-
> bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Jeff Brown
> Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2008 10:11 PM
> To: MPI 3.0 ABI working group; mpi3-abi_at_[hidden]
> Subject: Re: [Mpi3-abi] Meeting notes from 10th March
> 
> I propose a way we can make progress ...
> 
> Let's start populating a matrix (excel spreadsheet) with a column for
> each MPI implementation, and rows for the various MPI datatypes,
> constants, etc. where the internal implementations varys.  I'll kick
> it off for OpenMPI and send out.
> 
> The last column of the matrix can be "ABI" where we propose a common
> approach across the implementations.
> 
> A couple of driving principles:
> 1. the ABI solution shouldn't negatively impact quality of
implementation
> 2. minimize platform specific solutions
> 
> I'd like to see if we can produce a single ABI that spans platforms.
> 
> comments?
> 
> Jeff
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mpi3-abi mailing list
> mpi3-abi_at_[hidden]
> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi3-abi



More information about the Mpi3-abi mailing list