Re: [mpich-discuss] Bug reporting for some mpi/rma tests

20 Jul 2016

      Hi Clï¿½ment,

Please use the test suite in the latest release, so you will not get 
trouble with some bugs that we have already fixed.

Min

On 7/20/16 4:44 AM, Clï¿½ment Foyer wrote:
...
Hi Min,
Although it may have been fixed in later version (as I am currently 
using test suite from mpich 3.1), the window creation (l.125) is 
stated as follow :
MPI_Win_create( rmabuffer, bufsize, sizeof(int), 
MPI_INFO_NULL, MPI_COMM_WORLD, &win );
with bufsize being equal to RMA_SIZE (2048) on master's side, and 0 on 
partner side. However, the bufsize argument is the size of the window 
in bytes, not in "displacement_unit" (here being sizeof(int) ). so the 
range is int[157: 157+512], but the window is defined with a range 
int[0: RMA_SIZE / sizeof(int)], creating an overflow.
Clï¿½ment FOYER
Message: 1
    Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 09:46:59 -0500
    From: Min Si <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
    To: <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
    Subject: Re: [mpich-discuss] Bug reporting for some mpi/rma tests
    Message-ID: <[email protected]
    <mailto:[email protected]>>
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; Format="flowed"
Hi C. FOYER,
Thanks for reporting bugs to us.
However, the places in test rma/lockcontention3.c are correct.
    The buffers' size is RMA_SIZE (2048) count of int. In case 9, 10,
    11 the
    operations' size is longcount(512) count of int, and the largest
    target
    displacement is OFFSET_3(157), which means the window buffer is
    accessed
    in range int[157: 157+512]. Thus no overflows.
In rma/manyrma3.c, as you reported, we missed verification and winbuf
    initialization. We will fix it.
Min
On 7/12/16 3:08 AM, Cl?ment Foyer wrote:
    > Hi everyone,
    >
    > I think I may have found some bugs in mpich tests for RMA
    operations.
    >
    > First, in rma/lockcontention3.c.
    > When calling RMA operations, the different offsets are not taken in
    > account on the origin_count and target_count parameters. As the
    > buffers are the same sizes, when the count arguments are equal to
    > "longcount" (such as in the tests cases 9, 10 and 11), it either
    > overflows when the operation is actually done, or, as it should
    > preferably be done, it fails with the returns of the
    MPI_ERR_RMA_RANGE
    > error code.
    > Also, on the check function, there are some array overflows, as the
    > loops go from 0 to longcount-1, and the array is accessed with the
    > OFFSET (buf[OFFSET_1+j]).
    > The easiest solution would be to set bufsize (l.111) and getbufsize
    > (l.118) to RMA_SIZE+OFFSET_3 (OFFSET_3 being the bigger one), and
    > maybe allocate change l.123 to srcbuf = malloc((RMA_SIZE +
    > OFFSET_3)*sizeof(*srcbuf));
    > Also, the window is defined with the bufsize as size, which should
    > mean that the window is bufsize bytes long. But as it is an array of
    > int's, it would rather be bufsize*sizeof(int) long. There might be a
    > problem there as well, given the fact that the displacement unit
    given
    > is actually "sizeof(int)".
    >
    > rma/manyrma3.c
    > No verification is done. Just accumulate, and then we assume the
    > result is correct. Also, winbuf is not initialized.
    >
    > Sincerely yours,
    >
    > C. FOYER
_______________________________________________
discuss mailing list     [email protected]
To manage subscription options or unsubscribe:
https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
_______________________________________________
discuss mailing list     [email protected]
To manage subscription options or unsubscribe:
https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss