[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [mpi-21] Several administrative items
Bronis,
On 11/27/07 5:12 PM, "Bronis R. de Supinski" <bronis@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> 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?
I will forward you some mail that has this information.
>
> Also, I would be willing to give the external interfaces
> chapter a thorough read through. What is the time frame?
This would be great. It would be good to have this done before the first
meeting scheduled in Chicago, Jan 14-16. The plan is to get most of the
corrections done via e-mail, so it would be good to post anything you find
to the list for discussion, and potentially for inclusion in a future
ballot.
Good to have you participate,
Rich
>
> 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
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>