[mpich-discuss] MPICH-3.1.4 with PAMID: Win_lock

[Jeff Hammond]

I recommend filing the bug regarding the supported MPI.  I can't find any
statement in the MPI standard indicating it shouldn't work.

Jeff

On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 8:34 AM, Sebastian Rinke <rinke at cs.tu-darmstadt.de>
wrote:

> Thanks a lot for your answer!
>
> The same problem occurs in the supported MPI-2.2 on BGQ.
> Ok, I will try the OFI-based MPI-3.
>
> Thanks,
> Sebastian
>
> On 30 Mar 2017, at 17:12, Jeff Hammond <jeff.science at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I guess this is a bug but MPICH 3.1.x isn't the basis for the supported
> MPI on BGQ, so I doubt you will get much traction by reporting it.  IBM
> made an effort to support MPI-3 with PAMID but it was as an open-source,
> best effort project, and I recall there were some issues with it, including
> deadlock in certain asynchronous operations.
>
> You should try the supported MPI-2.2 implementation on BGQ or try the
> unsupported OFI-based implementation of MPI-3.
>
> Disclaimer: The comments above are spoken in my capacity as the person who
> used to support MPI at ALCF, not my current job role.
>
> Best,
>
> Jeff
>
> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 3:21 AM, Sebastian Rinke <rinke at cs.tu-darmstadt.de
> > wrote:
>
>> Same window, i.e.:
>>
>> Process 0:
>>>
>>> Win_lock(MPI_LOCK_SHARED, target=A, window=win)
>>>
>> Win_lock(MPI_LOCK_SHARED, target=B, window=win)
>>
>>
>> Sebastian
>>
>>
>> On 30 Mar 2017, at 06:24, Jeff Hammond <jeff.science at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Same window or different windows?
>>
>> Jeff
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 5:59 PM Sebastian Rinke <rinke at cs.tu-darmstadt.de>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> I have some issue with MPI_Win_lock in MPICH-3.1.4 on Blue Gene/Q.
>>>
>>> Here is my example:
>>>
>>> Process 0:
>>>
>>> Win_lock(MPI_LOCK_SHARED, target=A)
>>> Win_lock(MPI_LOCK_SHARED, target=B)
>>>
>>> No matter what I use for A and B (given A != B), a process cannot
>>> acquire more than one lock
>>> at a time.
>>>
>>> To my understanding, it should be possible to acquire more than one lock.
>>>
>>> Can you confirm this issue?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Sebastian
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> discuss mailing list     discuss at mpich.org
>>> To manage subscription options or unsubscribe:
>>> https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>>
>> --
>> Jeff Hammond
>> jeff.science at gmail.com
>> http://jeffhammond.github.io/
>> _______________________________________________
>> discuss mailing list     discuss at mpich.org
>> To manage subscription options or unsubscribe:
>> https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> discuss mailing list     discuss at mpich.org
>> To manage subscription options or unsubscribe:
>> https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Jeff Hammond
> jeff.science at gmail.com
> http://jeffhammond.github.io/
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list     discuss at mpich.org
> To manage subscription options or unsubscribe:
> https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list     discuss at mpich.org
> To manage subscription options or unsubscribe:
> https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>



-- 
Jeff Hammond
jeff.science at gmail.com
http://jeffhammond.github.io/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mpich.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20170330/3c2d9137/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
discuss mailing list     discuss at mpich.org
To manage subscription options or unsubscribe:
https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss