[Mpi3-hybridpm] Telecon on Dec. 22nd

[Pavan Balaji]

Folks,

Here are the meeting minutes for today's call:
https://svn.mpi-forum.org/trac/mpi-forum-web/wiki/MPI3Hybrid/notes-2009-12-22

Just as a reminder; we have some homework before the next call on Jan.
5th -- please check with your users which of the three options Marc
outlined they'd prefer. Basic distinction -- more functionality and more
functions or less functionality and less functions. The catch being
that, if we decide on "more functionality and more functions", even if
the user wants lesser functionality, the number of functions will not
reduce. Should be easy enough to explain :-).

 -- Pavan

On 12/21/2009 01:22 PM, Pavan Balaji wrote:
> Folks,
> 
> Here are some more agenda items from Steve Oyanagi:
> 
> 1. Create a ticket for Marc's proposal and otherwise make it a
>    more official Forum item.
> 2. Clean up the other hybridpm tickets.  How many have folded into
>    Marc's proposal?  Which are still active tickets we should be
>    thinking about or working on?
> 
> We can discuss these towards the end depending on the time available.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
>  -- Pavan
> 
> On 12/15/2009 11:25 PM, Pavan Balaji wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Apologies for the cancellation of the two previous telecons. I wanted to
>> send out the agenda for the next telecon (on Dec. 22nd, Tuesday, at 11am
>> central), so that it gets on everyone's calendar early this time.
>>
>> Agenda:
>>
>> The broad discussion item for the telecon is the issues raised at the
>> last face-to-face meeting on Marc's proposal. See the previous meeting
>> notes for more information
>> (https://svn.mpi-forum.org/trac/mpi-forum-web/wiki/MPI3Hybrid/notes-2009-11-11).
>>
>> We'll likely not have time to cover all the topics, but I'm hoping that
>> we can address (i) the API issues of MPI_Init_endpoint and NUM_ENDPOINTS
>> (and the associated bind calls) and (ii) semantic issues with respect to
>> using threads in collective operations (i.e., can threads initiate
>> collective operations before all end points are bound). These two cover
>> three of the six issues raised. I'm mostly pushing for these two aspects
>> since they are the biggest show-stoppers for an implementation of the
>> proposal. But I'm open to changing the priority order of issues to
>> discuss if others feel necessary.
>>
>> If there are other agenda items that need to be covered in this meeting,
>> please let me know.
>>
>> Doug: did you want to discuss the issues you brought up on the mailing
>> list in this telecon?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>  -- Pavan
>>
> 

-- 
Pavan Balaji
http://www.mcs.anl.gov/~balaji