Jeff, in the pcollreq extensions, I did both - no prototypes for pompi_FOO_f functions - prototypes for ompi_FOO_f functions are in an internal module, and that did not create any dependency.
I will issue a PR sometimes this week for you to review Cheers, Gilles On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 10:46 AM Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) via devel <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: > > On Jul 17, 2018, at 8:49 PM, Gilles Gouaillardet <gil...@rist.or.jp> wrote: > > > > I noted the internal Fortran bindings (e.g. [p]ompi_barrier_f and friends) > > are defined in the user facing mpi_f08.mod. > > > > My impressions are : > > > > 1. pompi_barrier_f and friends are never used (e.g. pbarrier_f08.F90 calls > > ompi_barrier_f and *not* pompi_barrier_f) > > > > 2. these symbols could be part of an internal module that is only used at > > build time, and hence do not have to end up in mpi_f08.mod > > > > 1) should the pompi_barrier_f and friends be called/removed/left untouched ? > > I presume you are referring to the pompi_FOO_f functions (and not the > ompi_FOO_f functions), right? (I ask because your opening sentence refers to > "[p]ompi_barrier_f") > > I think you noted that [p]barrier_f08.F90 both invoke ompi_barrier_f(). So > we definitely need the ompi_FOO_f() functions. > > But you're right -- I don't see a use of the pompi_FOO_f() functions. I > can't think of why they would be invoked at all. I think they're safe to > remove. > > > 2) is there any rationale (and which one) for having [p]ompi_foo_f symbols > > in mpi_f08.mod ? > > Per above, I don't think there's any use for the pompi_FOO_f symbols, though. > > The ompi_FOO_f symbols are *prototyped* in the mpi_f08 module -- they are not > defined there. > > We need the ompi_FOO_f symbols (which are the actual OMPI Fortran > implementations in ompi/mpi/fortran/mpif-h/*_f.c) so that we can call them > from F08 code. > > That being said, they *are* internal symbols, and we could *probably* put > them in a standalone, internal-only module (which I think is what you are > saying in point "2.", above). I don't think that that would created a > dependency from mpi_f08.mod to our internal module...? > > -- > Jeff Squyres > jsquy...@cisco.com > > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list > email@example.com > https://lists.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo/devel _______________________________________________ devel mailing list firstname.lastname@example.org https://lists.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo/devel