[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [mpi-21] Several administrative items
Rich:
So, the right people from LLNL were not on the mailing
list so we missed the Reno meeting. However, we are
interested in participating and probably can make a
meeting in Chicago (do I follow this correctly - it
would be January 14-16?). I was digging through the
archives but that seemed inefficient. Could you
provide me a full run down on the plans?
Also, I would be willing to give the external interfaces
chapter a thorough read through. What is the time frame?
Thanks,
Bronis
On Tue, 27 Nov 2007, Richard Graham wrote:
> Added you as the 3rd reviewer :-)
>
>
> On 11/27/07 4:50 PM, "George Bosilca" <bosilca@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Please add me as the second reviewer for the chapter 5.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > george.
> >
> > On Nov 27, 2007, at 4:39 PM, Rusty Lusk wrote:
> >
> >> I will do Chapter 5.
> >>
> >> Rusty
> >>
> >> On Nov 26, 2007, at 10:51 AM, Richard Graham wrote:
> >>
> >>> MPI 2.1:
> >>> ********
> >>>
> >>> As we agreed to in Reno, I am soliciting for people who are willing
> >>> to be
> >>> responsible for a careful reading of a chapter the MPI 2.0
> >>> standard. The
> >>> intent is to have a deliberate effort to fix obvious errors, and
> >>> find items
> >>> that need clarification so that we can finish the 2.1 process by
> >>> mid year
> >>> 2008. What we need to have as an outcome is a list of proposed
> >>> changes to
> >>> the standard that can for the basis for an e-mail discussion, and
> >>> then
> >>> eventually a vote. All are encouraged to review the standard, and
> >>> participate in this process. It at all possible, it would be nice
> >>> to have a
> >>> first draft for review by the Jan 14-16 meeting. Note that there
> >>> is already
> >>> a list of changes, as well as proposed changes on the MPI 2.1 web
> >>> site.
> >>> Please send the list a note, if you are willing to be responsible for
> >>> reading a chapter.
> >>>
> >>> Chapter 2: MPI-2 Terms and Conventions
> >>> Chapter 3: Version 1.2 of MPI
> >>> Chapter 4: Miscellany
> >>> Chapter 5: Process Creation and Management
> >>> Chapter 6: One-sided Communications
> >>> Chapter 7: Extended Collective Operations
> >>> Chapter 8: External Interfaces
> >>> Chapter 9: I/O
> >>> Chapter 10: Language Bindings - Jeff Squyres
> >>>
> >>> MPI 2.2
> >>> *******
> >>> I would like to publish an agenda in the next couple of weeks for
> >>> the Jan
> >>> 14-16 meeting. Please send in items that you would like to
> >>> discuss. Please
> >>> remember that 2.2 is intended to be "small" fixes to the API that
> >>> do not
> >>> change the nature of the standard itself. Sending in an item also
> >>> implies
> >>> that you will come prepared for a detailed discussion of the
> >>> proposal - why
> >>> this change is needed, pros and cons, impact on users, impact on
> >>> implementers, impact on other stake-holders. I expect to spend
> >>> about one
> >>> day on MPI 2.2 items, so we can most likely handle up to four such
> >>> items.
> >>> It would also be good to discuss these items via e-mail, just like we
> >>> discussed the "const" issue that was raised, so all of us can come
> >>> prepared
> >>> to discuss these items.
> >>>
> >>> MPI 3.0 (?)
> >>> ***********
> >>> Again, I would like to have items for the agenda in the next could
> >>> of weeks.
> >>> The first item will be a discussion of what the MPI 3.0 (if this is
> >>> what it
> >>> is called) be, and I will set aside a half day for this
> >>> discussion. If you
> >>> have opinions on what MPI 3.0 should include, please send these to
> >>> the list
> >>> - I will start the discussion with a summary of the issues raised,
> >>> to give
> >>> us a concrete starting point. Please send in items that we can
> >>> consider,
> >>> based on the out come of the initial discussions. These should
> >>> include only
> >>> items that people have already some experience with implementation
> >>> and
> >>> usage, or will be working on this in the process of this effort
> >>> (speculative
> >>> items should not go into the standard).
> >>>
> >>> Administrative items:
> >>> *********************
> >>> As of now, we don't have sufficient commitment to attend the
> >>> meetings to
> >>> reserve a block of rooms for the meeting (we will make meeting room
> >>> arrangements). I expect this is just because people have not had
> >>> time to do
> >>> this. If we can get on the order of 30-35 commitments, ORNL will
> >>> go ahead
> >>> and write a contract with the hotel, so please let me know in the
> >>> near
> >>> future if you plan to attend, and would like to reserve a hotel
> >>> room for
> >>> this. This is the current list of people who have indicated they
> >>> will
> >>> attend the first two (some only one) meetings (does not include
> >>> people local
> >>> to Chicago, who will not need rooms):
> >>>
> >>> Will Attend August meeting in Europe Org
> >>> *********** ************************
> >>> ********
> >>> Purushotham Bangalore UAB
> >>> Gil Bloch/others yes - no weekend
> >>> Mellanox
> >>> George Bosilca (1st meeting) UT
> >>> Ron Brightwell yes SNL
> >>> Edgar Gabriel yes UH
> >>> Patrick Geoffray
> >>> Myricom
> >>> David Gingold yes
> >>> SiCortex
> >>> Rich Graham yes
> >>> ORNL
> >>> Bill Gropp
> >>> Illinois
> >>> Erez Haba yes
> >>> Microsoft
> >>> Torsten Hoefler (or others)
> >>> Indiana U
> >>> Matt Koop
> >>> Ohio State
> >>> Quincey Koziol
> >>> HDF/Illinois
> >>> Kannan Narasimhan/ HP
> >>> David Solt
> >>> Yarek Nieplocha yes
> >>> PNNL
> >>> Jeff Squyres (1st, ? on rest) yes
> >>> Cicso
> >>> Alexander Supalov yes
> >>> Intel
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Rich
> >>>
> >>
> >
>