Open MPI logo

Open MPI Development Mailing List Archives

  |   Home   |   Support   |   FAQ   |   all Development mailing list

From: Jeff Squyres (jsquyres_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-09-26 18:01:31


Many thanks for these reports! I split up your e-mail into multiple reports
and filed each as its own tickets(#428 through #431).

On 9/26/06 4:02 PM, "Lisandro Dalcin" <dalcinl_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> I'am developing mpi4py, a MPI port for Python. I've wrote many
> unittest scripts for my wrappers, which also pretend to test MPI
> implementations.
>
> Below, I list some issues I've found when building my wrappers with
> Open MPI 1.1.1. Please let me know your opinions.
>
> - MPI_Group_translate_ranks(group1, n, ranks1, group2, ranks2) fails
> (with MPI_ERR_GROUP) if n != size(group1). Regarding the standard,
> I understand this routine should whork for any value of n, if
> ranks1 contains values (even if some are duplicated) in a valid
> range according to size(group1).
>
> - MPI_Info_get_nthkey(INFO, 0, key) does not fail when INFO is
> empty, ie, when MPI_Info_get_nkeys(info, &nkeys) returns nkeys==0.
>
> - Usage of MPI_IN_PLACE is broken in some collectives, below the
> reasons I've found:
>
> + MPI_Gather: with sendbuf=MPI_IN_PLACE, sendcount is not ignored.
> + MPI_Scatter: with recvbuf=MPI_IN_PLACE, recvcount is not ignored.
> + MPI_Allgather: with sendbuf=MPI_IN_PLACE, sendcount is not ignored.
>
> The standard says that [send|recv]count and [send|recv]type are
> ignored. I've not tested vector variants, perhaps they suffer the
> same problem.
>
> - Some extended collective communications failed (not by raising
> errors, but instead aborting tracing to stdout) when using
> intercommunicators. Sometimes, the problems appeared when
> size(local_group) != size(remote_group). However, MPI_Barrier and
> MPI_Bcast worked well. I still could not get the reasons for those
> failures. I've found a similar problem in MPICH2 when configured
> with error-cheking enabled (they had a bug in some error-cheking
> macros, I reported this issue and next they told me I was right).
>

-- 
Jeff Squyres
Server Virtualization Business Unit
Cisco Systems