[MPIWG Fortran] [mpiwg-tools] Proposal: MPI_SIZEOF not profiled
longb at cray.com
Mon May 19 10:34:55 CDT 2014
On May 19, 2014, at 10:08 AM, Rolf Rabenseifner <rabenseifner at hlrs.de> wrote:
> Yes, the "allowed as macros" on MPI-3.0 p555:32
> would allow a different mechanism for these routines
> that makes them non-interceptable.
> If this "non-interceptable" is done by other means
> than macro, then p555:35 "For routines implemented
> as macros, it is still required that the PMPI_
> version be supplied" would not apply!
I was curious why the PMPI versions had been exempted in the text quoted in the ticket. It seems to contradict the text quoted above. I’m inclined to require that the C library PMPI versions be supplied even if the MPI versions are implemented as non-interceptable. The PMPI version could be as simple as a wrapper around a macro. But it ensures that the C library PMPI version exists for cross-language calling (where macros don’t work).
> It is bad to use different wording for having
> better English quality ;-(
> And your are right, my "#ifdef MPI_Wait" says
> therefore nothing.
> Do you all agree that wording in
> p19:48 - p20:5 and p555:31-37 is at all inconsistent
> and therefore new and useful wording is needed
> in this erratum?
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "N.M. Maclaren" <nmm1 at cam.ac.uk>
>> To: "MPI-WG Fortran working group" <mpiwg-fortran at lists.mpi-forum.org>
>> Sent: Monday, May 19, 2014 4:35:10 PM
>> Subject: Re: [MPIWG Fortran] [mpiwg-tools] Proposal: MPI_SIZEOF not profiled
>> On May 19 2014, Rolf Rabenseifner wrote:
>>> your text goes beyond the errata goal.
>>> The errata goal was:
>>> - adding the missing Status conversion
>>> - adding MPI_SIZEOF
>>> And this works as errata.
>>> Your goal is to allow also
>>> - Fortran non-interceptable for these routines.
>>> Your additional Change is to allow other methods
>>> than C macros for C.
>>> This would prevent "#ifdef MPI_Wtime".
>>> All this would be MPI-4.0 and not MPI-3.0 errata.
>> Would it? I don't know what useful effect you would expect
>> "#ifdef MPI_Wtime" to achieve, but it assuredly would NOT tell
>> you (reliably) whether or not it can be accessed through the
>> profiling interface. 14.2 says:
>> 1. provide a mechanism through which all of the MPI defined
>> functions, except those allowed as macros (See Section 2.6.4),
>> may be accessed with a name shift.
>> Because it says "ALLOWED as macros", MPI_Wtime may not be accessed
>> through the profiling interface, whether or not it is implemented
>> as a macro. Doing so is a user error, leading to undefined
>> Therefore, an implementation may implement them as C inline
>> and would meet all of the requirements of MPI.
>> The error is more pervasive than just for Fortran. Because it did
>> not say what it meant, but something that was equivalent under K&R C
>> (sic), it wasn't strictly true in C90 and was rendered significantly
>> misleading (arguably erroneous) by C99. And that's the reason that
>> some people get very unhappy about the proposed partial fix.
>> It's also why the best solution is to regard ALL of the wording as
>> an error - which would probably mean starting a new ticket. But it's
>> definitely an error in the wording, not a change.
>> Nick Maclaren.
>> mpiwg-fortran mailing list
>> mpiwg-fortran at lists.mpi-forum.org
> Dr. Rolf Rabenseifner . . . . . . . . . .. email rabenseifner at hlrs.de
> High Performance Computing Center (HLRS) . phone ++49(0)711/685-65530
> University of Stuttgart . . . . . . . . .. fax ++49(0)711 / 685-65832
> Head of Dpmt Parallel Computing . . . www.hlrs.de/people/rabenseifner
> Nobelstr. 19, D-70550 Stuttgart, Germany . . . . (Office: Room 1.307)
> mpiwg-fortran mailing list
> mpiwg-fortran at lists.mpi-forum.org
Bill Long longb at cray.com
Fortran Technical Suport & voice: 651-605-9024
Bioinformatics Software Development fax: 651-605-9142
Cray Inc./ Cray Plaza, Suite 210/ 380 Jackson St./ St. Paul, MN 55101
More information about the mpiwg-fortran