Igor Peshansky wrote:
>Aniruddha,
>
>Actually, this looks like a different bug. When processing local
>declarations, the compiler does not check the "value"ness of the local
>being declared, and so e ends up referencing the same object as f (which
>is not a value array). Thanks for the report.
> Igor
>
>
Right, the compiler should flag this program as illegal (and does not do
so now).
The right idiom is
double [.] f = new double [ [1:5, 1:5] ];
final double value [.] e = f.toValueArray();
This should work.
Best,
Vijay
>"Shet, Aniruddha G." wrote on 04/10/2007 09:15:07 PM:
>
>
>
>>Igor,
>>
>>This probably is the same problem, but just to be sure...
>>
>>double [.] f = new double [ [1:5, 1:5] ];
>>final double value [.] e = f;
>>
>>e should be a value copy of the local reference array f and hence
>>accessible from any place. But a BadPlaceException is currently thrown
>>due to the bug. Is my understanding correct?
>>
>>Thanks,
>>Aniruddha
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Igor Peshansky
>>Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2007 1:04 PM
>>To: Shet, Aniruddha G.
>>Cc: x10-users<at>lists.sourceforge.net
>>Subject: Re: [X10-users] Array assignment & update/overlay
>>
>>Igor Peshansky wrote on 04/04/2007 12:24:30 PM:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Aniruddha,
>>>
>>>No, b *is* a copy, but not a value array.
>>>
>>>This is actually a bug in the X10 runtime libraries' implementation.
>>>The restriction ("|") operator does not create a value array, even if
>>>applied to a value array. That's why you get the place checks, etc.
>>>We'll need to fix this.
>>>
>>>In the meantime, you can turn off place checks using the
>>>-BAD_PLACE_RUNTIME_CHECK=false runtime option. If you don't want to
>>>do that, you can make sure a value copy is created by using the
>>>following snippet:
>>>
>>>final double value [.] a_sub = a | subD; final double value [.] b
>>>(point p) { return a_sub[p]; };
>>>
>>>
>>Sorry, I meant
>>
>>final double value[] b = new double[a_sub.distribution] (point p) {
>>return a_sub[p]; };
>>
>>
>>
>>>(Vijay will, hopefully, correct me if this is wrong).
>>> Igor
>>>
>>>"Shet, Aniruddha G." wrote on 04/04/2007 11:09:29 AM:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Igor,
>>>>
>>>>In the code that I sent, if b were declared as
>>>>
>>>>final double value [.] b = a | subD;
>>>>
>>>>can I expect a local copy to be created or is b treated only as a
>>>>reference to a section of a? I see that a BadPlaceException is
>>>>thrown when I try to access an element in b, which indicates that no
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>local
>>>>
>>>>
>>copy
>>
>>
>>>>is created.
>>>>
>>>>Thanks,
>>>>Aniruddha
>>>>
>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>From: Igor Peshansky
>>>>Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2007 1:13 AM
>>>>To: Shet, Aniruddha G.
>>>>Cc: x10-users<at>lists.sourceforge.net
>>>>Subject: RE: [X10-users] Array assignment & update/overlay
>>>>
>>>>Aniruddha,
>>>>
>>>>Thanks for the detailed report. I've reproduced the first problem
>>>>
>>>>
>>here.
>>
>>
>>>>We'll debug it and get back
>>>>to you. In the meantime, since you're on an SMP, you can turn off
>>>>BadPlaceExceptions by using the -BAD_PLACE_RUNTIME_CHECK=false
>>>>
>>>>
>>option.
>>
>>
>>>>The second problem is a bug, but only because the code to throw the
>>>>appropriate kind of exception never got written, so an assertion is
>>>>tripped instead.
>>>> Igor
>>>>
>>>>"Shet, Aniruddha G." wrote on 04/03/2007 11:20:10 PM:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Hi Igor,
>>>>>
>>>>>In the foll piece of code, the activity at place 0 is trying to
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>update
>>
>>
>>>>>a locally allocated reference array with a block from a
>>>>>distributed value
>>>>>array:-
>>>>>
>>>>>public class test {
>>>>> final region R = [1:20, 1:20];
>>>>> final dist D = dist.factory.block(R);
>>>>> final double value [.] a = new double value [D] (point
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>[i,j])
>>
>>
>>>>>{return i+j;};
>>>>>
>>>>> public void run() {
>>>>> async(here) {
>>>>> double [.] b = new double [ [15:19, 1:5]
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>];
>>
>>
>>>>> final dist subD = D | [15:19, 1:5];
>>>>> b.update(a | subD);
>>>>> }
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> public static void main(String[] args) {
>>>>> new test().run();
>>>>> }
>>>>>}
>>>>>
>>>>>This code throws the foll error when run with 4 places:-
>>>>>
>>>>>Exception in thread "pool-0-thread-0: Main Activity"
>>>>>BadPlaceException(dist. array, var location=place(id=2) access at
>>>>>place=place(id=0))
>>>>> at x10.lang.Runtime.hereCheckPlace(Runtime.java:313)
>>>>> at x10.array.DoubleArray.get(DoubleArray.java:103)
>>>>> at x10.array.DoubleArray.get(DoubleArray.java:100)
>>>>> at x10.array.DoubleArray.update(DoubleArray.java:389)
>>>>> at test$2.runX10Task(test.java:133)
>>>>> at
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>x10.runtime.InvocationStrategy$DefaultStrategy.invokeX10Task(Invocatio
>>
>>
>>>>>nS
>>>>>trategy.java:57)
>>>>> at x10.runtime.Activity.run(Activity.java:192)
>>>>> at
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.runTask(ThreadPoolExecu
>>
>>
>>>>>to
>>>>>r.java:665)
>>>>> at
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.
>>
>>
>>>>>ja
>>>>>va:690)
>>>>> at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:799)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>I would like some more clarifications here --
>>>>>
>>>>>-- If I were to def b as "double [.] b = new double [ [1:5, 1:5]
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>]"
>>
>>
>>>>>and leave subD unchanged, then I get the error:-
>>>>>
>>>>>Exception in thread "pool-0-thread-0: Main Activity"
>>>>>java.lang.AssertionError
>>>>> at x10.array.DoubleArray.update(DoubleArray.java:382)
>>>>> at test$2.runX10Task(test.java:133)
>>>>> at
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>x10.runtime.InvocationStrategy$DefaultStrategy.invokeX10Task(Invocatio
>>
>>
>>>>>nS
>>>>>trategy.java:57)
>>>>> at x10.runtime.Activity.run(Activity.java:192)
>>>>> at
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.runTask(ThreadPoolExecu
>>
>>
>>>>>to
>>>>>r.java:665)
>>>>> at
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.
>>
>>
>>>>>ja
>>>>>va:690)
>>>>> at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:799)
>>>>>
>>>>>b here has the same shape and size as before, but a different
>>>>>index
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>set.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>I feel that such a capability is desirable.
>>>>>
>>>>>-- Correct me if I am wrong in saying that if two arrays have
>>>>>identical regions but different distributions, then
>>>>>assignment/update/overlay operations should run correctly so long
>>>>>as
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>the locality rule is not violated.
>>>>>
>>>>>Thanks,
>>>>>Aniruddha
>>>>>-----------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>Aniruddha G. Shet |Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>>Oak Ridge National Laboratory |Phone: +1 (865) 576 5606
>>>>>http://www.csm.ornl.gov/~anish12/ |Fax: +1 (865) 576 5491
>>>>>-----------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>>From: Igor Peshansky
>>>>>Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2007 9:41 PM
>>>>>To: Shet, Aniruddha G.
>>>>>Cc: x10-users<at>lists.sourceforge.net
>>>>>Subject: Re: [X10-users] Array assignment & update/overlay
>>>>>
>>>>>Shet, Aniruddha G. wrote on 04/03/2007 09:25:03 PM:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>My understanding is that array assignment and update/overlay
>>>>>>operations are not designed to operate on arrays that do not
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>having
>>
>>
>>>>>>matching distributions, even though they may have matching
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>regions?
>>
>>
>>>>>>I am seeing that an activity that tries to update a local
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>reference
>>
>>
>>>>>>type array with a subdistribution of a global array that is
>>>>>>final value type fails with BadPlaceException. The local array
>>>>>>and the subdistribution have identical regions. The locality
>>>>>>rule is not being
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>violated here. Is the mismatch of distributions the reason for
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>failure?
>>>>>
>>>>>Hi, Aniruddha,
>>>>>
>>>>>This behavior sounds like a bug. The way you described it, it
>>>>>certainly does not correspond to the X10 language definition.
>>>>>
>>>>>It would help greatly in debugging this problem if you could
>>>>>reduce
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>it
>>
>>
>>>>>to a simple (and preferably short) test case. Feel free to post
>>>>>it
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>to
>>
>>
>>>>>the list or enter it in Bugzilla. It would also help if you could
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>show the full stack trace of the BadPlaceException you're getting.
>>>>> Igor
>>>>>
>>>>>
>
>
>
--
X10: Programming parallel machines, productively (http://x10.sf.net)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
X10-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/x10-users
