Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Big MPI---point-to-point functionality (MPI_Count + miscellaneous) #100

Closed
tonyskjellum opened this issue Jun 14, 2018 · 3 comments
Closed
Assignees
Labels
scheduled reading Reading is scheduled for the next meeting wg-large-counts Large Counts Working Group wg-p2p Point-to-Point Working Group

Comments

@tonyskjellum
Copy link

tonyskjellum commented Jun 14, 2018

Problem

For 64-bit clean functionality, convenience, and symmetry, the Big MPI principles being applied in Ticket #80 to collective operations should be applied to MPI point-to-point functionality.

Proposal

MPI needs to be 64-bit clean throughout.

Changes to the Text

MPI_Count will replace int for counts; support counts > 2^31

Other checks of any non-64-bit-clean features in point-to-point after review.

This ticket does not address the MPI_Rank issue; that is a separate, cross-cutting ticket.

Impact on Implementations

No current API is impacted. New _X APIs for all point-to-point operations affected will be needed.

MPI implementations will have to be 64-bit clean inside since count*extent > 2^31 is already problematic for some implementations. New APIs will have to be added and the internals of MPI will have to be 64-bit capable for buffers and related issues.

Impact on Users

Users who opt in with the new API will be able to send and receive larger messages [MPI_Count]

References

See also Ticket #80, #97, #98, #99

PR https://github.com/mpi-forum/mpi-standard/pull/60

@tonyskjellum
Copy link
Author

Here is the initial text for the pull request:

mpi32-report-ticket100-pt2pt-20sep18-1641.pdf

@tonyskjellum tonyskjellum added scheduled reading Reading is scheduled for the next meeting and removed not ready labels Sep 20, 2018
@tonyskjellum tonyskjellum added this to the 2018-12 San Jose, USA milestone Sep 20, 2018
@wesbland
Copy link
Member

wesbland commented Oct 7, 2020

@tonyskjellum / @puribangalore - Is this issue replaced by #137? Can we close this?

@puribangalore
Copy link

puribangalore commented Oct 7, 2020 via email

@wesbland wesbland closed this as completed Oct 7, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
scheduled reading Reading is scheduled for the next meeting wg-large-counts Large Counts Working Group wg-p2p Point-to-Point Working Group
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants