Re: Thoughts on llvm/clang in base

["B. Estrade" <estrabd@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 03:45:48PM +0100, peeter (must) wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 3:33 PM, B. Estrade <estrabd@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 03:17:08PM +0100, peeter (must) wrote:
> >> Just to chime in with this, we're using OpenMPI on DF and it'd be
> >> very, very bad news for us if support for OpenMPI would be
> >> discontinued for the mentioned reason. We'd need to change the
> >> platform then. . .
> >>
> >> Cheers, Peeter
> >
> > Do you mean OpenMP (shared memory) or OpenMPI (message passing?).
> >
> > OpenMPI is a separate library and not tied into a compiler or its
> > runtime like OpenMP is (e.g., "GOMP" is the GCC project to handle the
> > frontend/transformations/runtime).

No problem, it happens all the time in this alphabet soup world in
which we live.

OpenMPI does have some things that allow you to combine OpenMP
and OpenMPI for hybrid message passing/shared memory programs.

OpenMPI (as you know) is a library, and pretty agnostic to the
platform and compiler suite.  OpenMP must be facilitated by the
compiler because their are frontend changes that must be made to
recognize and transform the source code directives as well as a
runtime that supports the OpenMP standard API during execution.  It's
a common mistake, though.

    http://www.openmp.org

    http://www.openmpi.org

GCC supports OpenMP directly, though OpenMPI can certainly be built
with GCC (and infact, most often is in commidity beowulf clusters).

    http://gcc.gnu.org/projects/gomp/

Cheers,
Brett

> >
> > Thank you,
> > Brett
> >
> >>
> >> --
> >
> 
> Oops! Sorry, I meant OpenMPI, the message passing interface. If this
> has no relevance to the topic, then apologies for the confusion.
> 
> Peeter
> 
> --

--