Open MPI logo

Open MPI User's Mailing List Archives

  |   Home   |   Support   |   FAQ   |   all Open MPI User's mailing list

Subject: Re: [OMPI users] Accessing to the send buffer
From: Terry Dontje (terry.dontje_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-08-02 06:52:20


I believe it is definitely a no-no to STORE (write) into a send buffer
while a send is posted. I know there have been debate in the forum to
relax LOADS (reads) from a send buffer. I think OMPI can handle the
latter case (LOADS). On the posted receive side you open yourself up
for some race conditions and overwrites if you do STORES or LOADS from a
posted receive buffer.

--td

Alberto Canestrelli wrote:
> Hi,
> I have a problem with a fortran code that I have parallelized with
> MPI. I state in advance that I read the whole ebook "Mit Press - Mpi -
> The Complete Reference, Volume 1" and I took different MPI classes, so
> I have a discrete MPI knowledge. I was able to solve by myself all the
> errors I bumped into but now I am not able to find the bug of my code
> that provides erroneous results. Without entering in the details of my
> code, I think that the cause of the problem could be reletad to the
> following aspect highlighted in the above ebook (in the follow I copy
> and paste from the e-book):
>
> A nonblocking post-send call indicates that the system may start
> copying data
> out of the send buffer. The sender must not access any part of the
> send buffer
> (neither for loads nor for STORES) after a nonblocking send operation
> is posted until
> the complete send returns.
> A nonblocking post-receive indicates that the system may start writing
> data into
> the receive buffer. The receiver must not access any part of the
> receive buffer after
> a nonblocking receive operation is posted, until the complete-receive
> returns.
> Rationale. We prohibit read accesses to a send buffer while it is
> being used, even
> though the send operation is not supposed to alter the content of this
> buffer. This
> may seem more stringent than necessary, but the additional restriction
> causes little
> loss of functionality and allows better performance on some systems-
> consider
> the case where data transfer is done by a DMA engine that is not
> cache-coherent
> with the main processor.End of rationale.
>
> I use plenty of nonblocking post-send in my code. Is it really true
> that the sender must not access any part of the send buffer not even
> for STORES? Or was it a MPI 1.0 issue?
> Thanks.
> alberto
> _______________________________________________
> users mailing list
> users_at_[hidden]
> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users

-- 
Oracle
Terry D. Dontje | Principal Software Engineer
Developer Tools Engineering | +1.650.633.7054
Oracle * - Performance Technologies*
95 Network Drive, Burlington, MA 01803
Email terry.dontje_at_[hidden] <mailto:terry.dontje_at_[hidden]>



picture