[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [mpi-21] Follow up on the MPI Forum meeting
- To: mpi-21@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [mpi-21] Follow up on the MPI Forum meeting
- From: Jeff Squyres <jsquyres@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 10:52:52 -0500
- Authentication-results: rtp-dkim-1; header.From=jsquyres@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/rtpdkim1001 verified; );
- Delivered-to: mpifrm-mpi-21-outgoing@mailbouncer.mcs.anl.gov
- Delivered-to: mpifrm-mpi-21@mailbouncer.mcs.anl.gov
- Dkim-signature: v=0.5; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=1359; t=1195573988; x=1196437988; c=relaxed/simple; s=rtpdkim1001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=jsquyres@cisco.com; z=From:=20Jeff=20Squyres=20<jsquyres@cisco.com> |Subject:=20Re=3A=20[mpi-21]=20Follow=20up=20on=20the=20MPI=20Forum=20mee ting |Sender:=20 |To:=20mpi-21@mpi-forum.org; bh=jwu3X8LoqC74ZiUy/7uDI8CWbxcHfNJcizJxiyjARlg=; b=cO31+VlW1Gj19cOK5EDbh1dKBhZ02bCK7FG3WKoa0QwQNpSYexIJR1BLs7QtNvro4xZ+E4Oq mN+9yA8DdxmrOTrFYDVIXRoO6VU0TLPtE6zgJOX7PJnc0V0RcLM4xn40;
- In-reply-to: <C363D66C.10F26%rlgraham@ornl.gov>
- References: <C363D66C.10F26%rlgraham@ornl.gov>
- Reply-to: mpi-21@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Sender: owner-mpi-21@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Nov 16, 2007, at 11:21 PM, Richard Graham wrote:
MPI 2.2 is intended to introduce "small" additions to the standard,
with the
flavor of obvious errors/omissions in the 2.0 interface. This
includes
items such as adding appropriate const declarations to interface
parameters,
making it easier to send more than 2 GB, and the like. I am sure
there will
be plenty of discussion on what constitutes "a small changes. The
goal is
to complete this process by Jan, 2008, and this will most likely be
the
focus of our first face-to-face meeting. We already started to
compile this
list in our meeting in Reno, so please continue to add to this
list. At
this stage these items should be brought up on the mailing list, but
I am
hoping to set up a bit more efficient process to make sure we
capture all
the items of interest.
I'm not convinced that we want to call this effort "2.2." My US$0.02
(which is pretty weak on the international market these days!) is that
we should reserve the entire 2.x series for bug fixes. New things --
however small -- should go into the 3.x effort.
Specifically: the MPI-2 interface should be involatile. It should not
be changed unless there is a specific bug that needs to be fixed.
--
Jeff Squyres
Cisco Systems