[Mpi3-tools] MPIT_PERFORMANCE_ALL and layering
Dave Goodell
goodell at mcs.anl.gov
Tue Feb 16 17:35:22 CST 2010
I think that we should reconsider including MPIT_PERFORMANCE_ALL as it
currently exists in the MPIT proposal because it discourages libraries
and layering among performance tools. If you have two tool libraries
and one or both of them use MPIT_PERFORMANCE_ALL to start/stop their
performance variables, the tools are likely to be incompatible. One
of MPI's great strengths is providing support mechanisms for parallel
libraries, I don't see why we should omit those mechanisms in the
tools space.
I understand the convenience and (potentially) performance arguments
to be made for having functionality like this, but we might want to
consider scoping it sort of like we do for communicators. Perhaps
make it possible to group handles or open handles with an associated
context of sorts to perform the group start/stop operations later.
Alternatively, if there is no substantial performance argument to be
made, we could just drop MPIT_PERFORMANCE_ALL altogether. A for-loop
isn't particularly burdensome to tools/applications.
I don't have a concrete alternative proposal here, I just wanted to
bring up the issue for discussion. I unfortunately missed the last
concall due to technical difficulties, so I wasn't able to bring it up
there.
-Dave
More information about the mpiwg-tools
mailing list