Dear all,
as discussed during the last face-to-face and the virtual meeting, we
would like to avoid reading the full proposal again at the Zurich meeting.
The idea is to give a general overview of the API and then go through
the changes since the last face-to-face.
The ticket: https://github.com
Dear all,
After passing the reading in Zürich, the tools WG plans a 1st vote for
MPI_T Events:
Issue #79: https://github.com/mpi-forum/mpi-issues/issues/79
PR #33: https://github.com/mpi-forum/mpi-standard/pull/33
Cheers,
Marc-Andre
On 23.11.19 22:56, Martin Schulz via mpi-forum wrote:
> Hi all
Hi Jeff, Hi Martin,
argh ... sorry for being so late on this (see my other mail), but
could you take the two calls
MPI_T_pvar_handle_alloc
MPI_T_cvar_handle_alloc
out of the embiggening? The MPI_Count for the count argument does not
really help in practice, so we (the tools WG) decided we would
Hi all,
Sorry for the noise. Was intended as a private reply.
Cheers,
Marc-Andre
On 04.02.20 08:10, Marc-André Hermanns wrote:
> Hi Jeff, Hi Martin,
>
> argh ... sorry for being so late on this (see my other mail), but
> could you take the two calls
>
> MPI_T_pvar_handle_alloc
> MPI_T_cvar_han
Hi all,
the Tools WG would like a second vote on:
Callback-driven event interface for MPI_T
Issue: https://github.com/mpi-forum/mpi-issues/issues/79
PR: https://github.com/mpi-forum/mpi-standard/pull/33
Cheers,
Marc-Andre
On 22.01.20 13:35, Martin Schulz via mpi-forum wrote:
> (Sorry, some may
Hi all,
the Tools WG would *also* like a reading on:
Clarify behavior for invalid MPI_T binding arguments
Issue: https://github.com/mpi-forum/mpi-issues/issues/160
PR: https://github.com/mpi-forum/mpi-standard/pull/161
Cheers,
Marc-Andre
On 04.02.20 21:13, Marc-André Hermanns wrote:
> Hi all,
>
Dear all,
I would like to read ticket #160 at the June meeting:
Title: https://github.com/mpi-forum/mpi-standard/pull/161
Issue: https://github.com/mpi-forum/mpi-issues/issues/160
PR: https://github.com/mpi-forum/mpi-standard/pull/161
Cheers,
Marc-Andre
--
Dr. rer. nat. Marc-André Hermanns
IT
Subject: EuroMPI/USA 2020: Call For Research Posters
EuroMPI/USA 2020
Austin, TX USA
Sep 21-24, 2020
Research Poster Submissions due Jul 25, 2020 (AOE)
EuroMPI/USA 2020 will continue to increase its focus outside MPI, to
include extensions or alternative inter
Dear all,
the tools working group would like to read the following errata:
Changes to MPI_T Events if info objects were available before MPI
initialization:
Issue: https://github.com/mpi-forum/mpi-issues/issues/148
PR: https://github.com/mpi-forum/mpi-standard/pull/274
Clarify when to return in
Hi Martin,
should we discuss Ticket 433:
https://github.com/mpi-forum/mpi-issues/issues/433
This just came up end of last week when Ken was implementing MPI_T for
mpich and I think for me it would be good to discuss on how to move
forward on that.
Maybe the "full" crowd is too much, yet it would
Dear all,
the Tools WG would like to get some plenary feedback on the following
topics:
Tools WG PR: Function Pointer Interception (QMPI)
https://github.com/mpiwg-tools/mpi-standard/pull/10
Forum Issue 519: Add functions to check multiple request statuses at once
https://github.com/mpi-forum/mp
Dear all,
the tools group wants to read two tickets at the next meeting:
-
#542: Correct usage of the terms error and return codes in the tools
chapter
Issue: https://github.com/mpi-forum/mpi-issues/issues/542
PR: https://github.com/mpi-foru
Dear Martin, all,
we don't have readings prepared, yet would like some discussion and
plenary time for the Tools topics.
A topic I would like to discuss (as it's currently blocking progress
[no pun intended] for the MPI_Request_get_status* ticket) is whether
get_status is intended to make pr
Dear all,
the tools working group would like to read the following tickets at
the December Meeting:
Link to project view here:
https://github.com/orgs/mpi-forum/projects/1/views/3?filterQuery=is%3Aopen+label%3A%22wg-tools%22
"Mention behanvior with potential overflow"
Issue: https://github.c
assume you also intend to announce errata votes for #443 and #160?
Thanks,
Wes
On Nov 17, 2022, at 11:16 AM, Marc-André Hermanns via mpi-forum
wrote:
Dear all,
the tools working group would like to read the following tickets at the
December Meeting:
Link to project view here:
https://github.com
Dear all,
hopefully still in time I want to announce some readings for the Tools
Working Group:
LIS entries in MPI_T chapter not reflecting IN vs. INOUT as defined in
Term 2.3 chapter
Issue: https://github.com/mpi-forum/mpi-issues/issues/443
PR: https://github.com/mpi-forum/mpi-standard/pull
Hi all,
the tools working group would like to discuss the following tickets:
Readings:
=
MPI_Type_get_value_index
Issue: https://github.com/mpi-forum/mpi-issues/issues/520
PR: https://github.com/mpi-forum/mpi-standard/pull/798
Non-standard wildcard notation
Issue: https://github.com/mp
Dear all,
On behalf of the Tools WG, I'd like to announce a no-no vote and a 1st
vote of Ticket #520 and PR #798:
Issue: https://github.com/mpi-forum/mpi-issues/issues/520
PR: https://github.com/mpi-forum/mpi-standard/pull/798
No-No:
https://github.com/mpi-forum/mpi-standard/pull/798/commits/
Dear all,
On behalf of the tools working group I would like to announce
Add compound datatypes for large integers for MPI_(MIN|MAX)LOC
Issue#520: https://github.com/mpi-forum/mpi-issues/issues/520
PR#798: https://github.com/mpi-forum/mpi-standard/pull/798
for second vote.
Cheers,
Marc-Andre
Hi Rolf,
thanks for double checking this and for the hard work you put into the
preparation of 4.1.
You might be right that this behavior may imply changes either in an
implementation or in a tool (as any observable behavior will
eventually be relied upon by someone).
I would therefore agr
23 12:31, Marc-André Hermanns via mpi-forum wrote:
Hi Rolf,
thanks for double checking this and for the hard work you put into the
preparation of 4.1.
You might be right that this behavior may imply changes either in an
implementation or in a tool (as any observable behavior will
eventual
Dear all,
as announced during the December meeting this week, the tools working
group wants to work on some larger proposals again (QMPI, Handle
Introspection, MPI_T Side Doc, Unique IDs) that may have a larger
impact on implementations and we wanted to grow the circle of people
participating
Dear all,
this is just a brief reminder, that for 2024 we changed our meeting
slot to
Mondays 10 a.m. Central Time
with alternating focus on "performance topics" and "debugging topics".
Connection Details can be found at [1]. If you need access, let me
know your Github handle.
Not all
Dear all,
the Tools WG would like to read the following two tickets:
Title: Missing primary index and description of MPI_T_source_order
Issue: https://github.com/mpi-forum/mpi-issues/issues/804
PR: https://github.com/mpi-forum/mpi-standard/pull/962
Title: mpiexec and PMPI_ falsely appearing in
Sorry. Initial mail went to the WG list only
Forwarded Message
Subject: Tools WG Reading
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2024 08:25:41 +0200
From: Marc-André Hermanns
To: MPI Forum - Tools WG
Dear all,
the Tool group would like to read:
Title: Example for Fortran 2008 Wrapper is not in
25 matches
Mail list logo
