From jsquyres@XXXXXXXXX Thu Feb  7 11:25:46 2008
Delivered-To: mpifrm-mpi-21-outgoing@XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
X-Original-To: mpifrm-mpi-21@XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Delivered-To: mpifrm-mpi-21@XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Cc: mpi-21@XXXXXXXXXXXXX
From: Jeff Squyres <jsquyres@XXXXXXXXX>
To: "Mailing list for discussion of MPI 2.1" <mpi-21@XXXXXXXXXXX>
In-Reply-To: <47AB3A06.7050603@XXXXXXX>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v915)
Subject: Re: [mpi-21] Ballot 4 proposal: fix attribute example 4.13
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2008 12:25:05 -0500
References: <0367FBAD-2ACE-4BBD-99D8-9D2FB6E0F92B@XXXXXXXXX> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.915)
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 Feb 2008 17:25:18.0557 (UTC) FILETIME=[68EBD0D0:01C869AE]
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=2839; t=1202405135; x=1203269135;
	c=relaxed/simple; s=rtpdkim1001;
	h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version;
	d=cisco.com; i=jsquyres@XXXXXXXXXX
	z=From:=20Jeff=20Squyres=20<jsquyres@XXXXXXXXX>	|Subject:=20Re=3A=20[mpi-21]=20Ballot=204=20proposal=3A=20f
	ix=20attribute=20example=204.13
	|Sender:=20
	|To:=20=22Mailing=20list=20for=20discussion=20of=20MPI=202.
	1=22=20<mpi-21@XXXXXXXXXXX>;	bh=RPAZrueLzVvsMgeK1DAntUESkhfzl9LOuj1jGliaY64=;
	b=YK9KB8v05P4psyPF15vaGLxKpk9IdrEa4/95UarCwbggQsOYJfYdMDfphP
	tpENlJk9xKPHsxpfAc6o8YzEBZ/3MCwpMrkUk1Rzgq0/TvbuEY6byBk1CoFU
	Q4gaACCp7a;
Authentication-Results: rtp-dkim-1; header.From=jsquyres@XXXXXXXXXX dkim=pass (
	sig from cisco.com/rtpdkim1001 verified; ); 
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20030616-p10 (Debian) at mailbouncer.mcs.anl.gov
Sender: owner-mpi-21@XXXXXXXXXXXXX
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: mpi-21@XXXXXXXXXXXXX
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20030616-p10 (Debian) at mailbouncer.mcs.anl.gov

Terry and I further noticed that there appears to be another minor  
problem in example 4.13.  So here's an addendum to the proposal:

MPI-2:4.12.7 p59 line 1 reads:

   int *p

But should read

   MPI_Aint *p

Rationale: The value that is set from fortran is an  
INTEGER(kind=MPI_ADDRESS_KIND).  Hence, to dereference it properly,  
the corresponding C pointer type needs to be an (MPI_Aint*), not (int*).


On Feb 7, 2008, at 12:04 PM, Terry Dontje wrote:

> After talking with Jeff and reading the spec further I retract my
> concern because the spec does explicitly cover my concern in the  
> verbage
> above example 4.13.
>
> --td
>
> Terry Dontje wrote:
>> Sorry I didn't send this out sooner but in reading the discussion for
>> the errata item "Interlaguage use of Attributes" I think the below
>> proposal has a potential hole that never was resolved in the mail
>> discussion in:
>> http://www.cs.uiuc.edu/homes/wgropp/projects/parallel/MPI/mpi-errata/discuss/getattr/
>>
>>
>> The specific hole pointed out by Nick Nevin in the following  
>> paragraph
>> from the email discussion:
>>
>> This might work for predefined attributes where the address can
>> point to the integer value in static storage, but won't work for
>> attributes set by the user in Fortran code.  If you store a pointer
>> to the integer as the attribute it may point to a temporary which
>> might no longer exist when you try and access it later.
>>
>>
>> So I think relying on the address passed in for the attribute as
>> opposed to the value could cause some
>> issues with Fortran.
>>
>> --td
>> Jeff Squyres wrote:
>>> Per
>>> http://www.cs.uiuc.edu/homes/wgropp/projects/parallel/MPI/mpi-errata/ 
>>> ,
>>> the errata item entitled "Error in Example 4.13 in MPI-2 (Use of
>>> Attributes in C and Fortran)".  I believe that this errata item
>>> supersedes the errata item "Interlanguage use of Attributes".
>>>
>>> See the mail discussing:
>>>
>>> http://www.cs.uiuc.edu/homes/wgropp/projects/parallel/MPI/mpi-errata/discuss/attrcandf/
>>>
>>>
>>> Proposal:
>>>
>>> Change MPI-2:4.12, p58:36 from:
>>>  IF (val.NE.5) THEN CALL ERROR
>>> to
>>>  IF (val.NE.address_of_i) THEN CALL ERROR
>>>
>>> Rationale:
>>>
>>> MPI-2:4.12 p58:12-13 and 16-18 clearly state that if an attribute is
>>> set by C, retrieving it in Fortran will obtain the address of the
>>> attribute.
>>>
>>> See the mails for more discussion, including an exhaustive list of
>>> what happens for each of the 9 possibilities of setting and getting
>>> attribute values between the different languages.
>>>
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mpi-21 mailing list
> mpi-21@XXXXXXXXXXX
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/mpi-21


-- 
Jeff Squyres
Cisco Systems