[Mpi3-tools] MPI function symbol naming convention for tools

[Martin Schulz]

Hi Craig, all,

(I cc-ed the tools group on this as well - this is regarding the
issue how the profiling interface will work with the proposed
new Fortran bindings):


On Jun 20, 2011, at 10:15 AM, Rasmussen, Craig E wrote:

> I've talked with Jeff Squyres and we come up with naming convention that we'd like to propose for tools to have access to Fortran.
> 
> I believe we need four different symbol naming conventions.  Consider MPI_Recv(), the four functions are
> 
> 1. mpi_recv_f
>        - This function implements (in C or Fortran) MPI_Recv with integer handles and the choice buffer passed by address.

Does this mean the existing mpi_recv binding will go away?
This would break any existing tool. Can we keep the old naming
scheme for the old interface? Or is this intended as an additional
symbol?

> 
> 2. mpi_recv_f_nostatus
>        - This function implements (in C or Fortran) MPI_Recv with integer handles without a status variable and the choice buffer passed by address.

Is this just for the new bindings?

> 
> 3. mpi_recv_f08
>        - This function implements (in C or Fortran) MPI_Recv with integer handles and the choice buffer passed via an array descriptor.
> 
> 4. mpi_recv_f_nostatus
>        - This function implements (in C or Fortran) MPI_Recv with integer handles without a status variable and the choice buffer passed via an array descriptor.

I assume you mean mpi_recv_f08_nostatus?

> 
> Note that these functions only need to support integer handles because of the way we (thanks to Rolf) have chosen to define the handle types in the mpi_f08 module.
> 
> Please comment on this naming convention.

Martin


> 
> -craig
> 
> 
> 
> 

________________________________________________________________________
Martin Schulz, schulzm at llnl.gov, http://people.llnl.gov/schulzm
CASC @ Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, USA