[mpiwg-tools] cvar / pvar names
schulzm at llnl.gov
Wed Oct 30 09:59:42 CDT 2013
I fully agree with Bill - think of MPI_T not as PAPI, but as perfctr below PAPI (with the same pros/cons). I am actually hoping that we not only do something similar to PAPI at some point, but we'll actually implement an MPI_T PAPI module, which would make all MPI_T variables instantly accessible to a wide range of tools. I had talked to the PAPI group about this a while ago while we wrote MPI_T and we should probably restart that effort.
On Oct 29, 2013, at 2:16 PM, William Gropp <wgropp at illinois.edu> wrote:
> These might emerge (as they did for PAPI - counters existed long before PAPI). However, implementations are likely to have many different variables. And a problem faced by PAPI uses is even though the names might be the same, then meanings are not always exactly the same.
> Portability is also not as big a problem. There just aren't that many distinct MPI implementations.
> William Gropp
> Director, Parallel Computing Institute
> Deputy Director for Research
> Institute for Advanced Computing Applications and Technologies
> Thomas M. Siebel Chair in Computer Science
> University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign
> On Oct 29, 2013, at 2:11 PM, Junchao Zhang wrote:
>> MPI_T depends on cvar/pvar names to locate variables. The spec says names are implementation specific. Then, how to make portable tools?
>> If MPI_T is an analog of PAPI, PAPI has standard event names, though not all are available on all CPUs.
>> Do we need an agreement on names of common variables?
>> Any comments?
>> --Junchao Zhang
>> mpiwg-tools mailing list
>> mpiwg-tools at lists.mpi-forum.org
> mpiwg-tools mailing list
> mpiwg-tools at lists.mpi-forum.org
Martin Schulz, schulzm at llnl.gov, http://people.llnl.gov/schulzm
CASC @ Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, USA
More information about the mpiwg-tools