1 / 6

Backward Compatibility WG

Backward Compatibility WG. “Where all the cool kids hang out”. The Big Issue: Counts Larger Than 2 31. Counts are expressed as “ int ” / “INTEGER” Usually limited to 2 31 Propose a new type: MPI_Count Can be larger than an int / INTEGER “Mixed sentiments” within the Forum

qamar
Download Presentation

Backward Compatibility WG

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Backward Compatibility WG “Where all the cool kids hang out”

  2. The Big Issue:Counts Larger Than 231 • Counts are expressed as “int” / “INTEGER” • Usually limited to 231 • Propose a new type: MPI_Count • Can be larger than an int / INTEGER • “Mixed sentiments” within the Forum • Is it useful? Do we need it? …oy! MPI_SEND(void *buf, int count, …) MPI_SEND(void *buf, MPI_Count count, …)

  3. Do we need MPI_Count? YES NO Very few users Affects many, many MPI API functions Potential incompatibilities E.g., mixing int and MPI_Count in the same application ✔ • Some users have asked for it • Trivially send large msgs. • No need to make a datatype • POSIX went to size_t • Why not MPI? • Think about the future: • Bigger RAM makes 231relevant • Datasets getting larger • Disk IO getting larger • Coalescing off-node msgs.

  4. Ok, so how to do it? (1 of 2) • Use MPI_Count only for new MPI-3 routines • Change C bindings • Rely on C auto-promotion • Only fix MPI IO functions • Where MPI_BYTE is used • New, duplicate functions • E.g., MPI_SEND_LARGE Inconsistent, confusing to users Bad for Fortran, bad for C OUT params Inconsistent, confusing to users What about sizes, tags, ranks, …oy! ✖ ✖ ✖ ✖

  5. Ok, so how to do it? (2 of 2) Forum has hated every proposal Technically makes current codes invalid • Fully support large datatypes • E.g., MPI_GET_COUNT_LONG • Create a system for API versioning • Update all functions to use MPI_Count • Make new duplicate functions with MPI_Count, MPI_Tag, MPI_Size, … • E.g., MPI_SEND_EX ✖ ✖ ✔ Might be ok…? Rip the band-aid off! Preserves backward Compatibility  ✔

  6. MPI Backwards Compatibility WG “Count on us to find a solution”

More Related