From rabenseifner@XXXXXXX Mon Jan 28 09:05:28 2008
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at testserv.rus.uni-stuttgart.de
X-Virus-Scanned: by mbox.uni-stuttgart.de
From: "Rolf Rabenseifner" <rabenseifner@XXXXXXX>
To: mpi-21@XXXXXXXXXXX
X-Mailer: CommuniGate Pro WebUser v5.0.9
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 15:44:19 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Spam-Details: rule=tag_notspam policy=tag score=0 spamscore=0 ipscore=0
	phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0
	reason=mlx engine=3.1.0-0708230000 definitions=main-0801280028 
X-Spam-OrigSender: rusrabe@XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
X-Spam-Bar: 
Subject: [mpi-21] Ballot 4 - Re: Re: SEND COUNT and RECEIVE COUNT
X-BeenThere: mpi-21@XXXXXXXXXXX
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.8
Precedence: list
Reply-To: "Mailing list for discussion of MPI 2.1" <mpi-21@XXXXXXXXXXX>
List-Id: "Mailing list for discussion of MPI 2.1" <mpi-21.cs.uiuc.edu>
	<mailto:mpi-21-request@XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX>List-Archive: <http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/private/mpi-21>
List-Post: <mailto:mpi-21@XXXXXXXXXXX>List-Help: <mailto:mpi-21-request@XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX>	<mailto:mpi-21-request@XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: mpi-21-bounces@XXXXXXXXXXX
Errors-To: mpi-21-bounces@XXXXXXXXXXX
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20030616-p10 (Debian) at mailgw.mcs.anl.gov

Bill, 
please can you forward this to Yukiya Aoyama <aoyama@XXX>,the originator of this track.
Thanks, Rolf
___________________________________
This is a proposal for MPI 2.1, Ballot 4.

This is a follow up to:
  Description of the send and receive count arguments to MPI_Alltoallv 
  in http://www.cs.uiuc.edu/homes/wgropp/projects/parallel/MPI/mpi-errata/index.html
with mail discussion in
  http://www.cs.uiuc.edu/homes/wgropp/projects/parallel/MPI/mpi-errata/discuss/alltoallv/

Based on the questions for clarification, I propose not to include
any further clarification into the standard.

Reason:
MPI-1, Sect. 4.8, MPI_ALLTOALLV, page 112, lines 37-40 clearly states:

  "The type signature associated with sendcount[j], sendtype at 
  process i must be equal to the type signature associated with 
  recvcount[i], recvtype at process j. This implies that the amount 
  of data sent must be equal to the amount of data received, pairwise 
  between every pair of processes. Distinct type maps between sender 
  and receiver are still allowed."

The same text is also used for 
MPI-2.0, Sect. 7.3.5 MPI_ALLTOALLW, page 165, lines 42-45.

Okay?

Best regards
Rolf


Dr. Rolf Rabenseifner . . . . . . . . . .. email rabenseifner@XXXXXXX
High Performance Computing Center (HLRS) . phone ++49(0)711/685-65530
University of Stuttgart . . . . . . . . .. fax ++49(0)711 / 685-65832
Head of Dpmt Parallel Computing . . . www.hlrs.de/people/rabenseifner
Nobelstr. 19, D-70550 Stuttgart, Germany . (Office: Allmandring 30)
_______________________________________________
mpi-21 mailing list
mpi-21@XXXXXXXXXXX
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/mpi-21