[petsc-users] --with-mpi=0

[Barry Smith]

  Satish,

    Yes, you are probably right; there may be no way to organize things to handle all the possibilities well. 

     Probably I over-reacted and it is best to leave things as if. 

    Barry


> On Dec 18, 2021, at 6:03 PM, Satish Balay <balay at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
> 
> Also we have:
> 
> include/petscsys.h:#  include <petsc/mpiuni/mpi.h>
> src/sys/mpiuni/f90-mod/mpiunimod.F90:#include <petsc/mpiuni/mpif.h>
> 
> And avoid -Iprefix/include/petsc/mpiuni/
> 
> So I'm not sure if adding this in can cause grief (as it would be required for mpi.mod at this location).
> 
> I have changes for mpiuni.mod -> mpi.mod at:
> 
> https://gitlab.com/petsc/petsc/-/merge_requests/4662
> 
> [they are a bit hakey]
> 
> Satish
> 
> 
> 
> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021, Satish Balay via petsc-users wrote:
> 
>> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021, Barry Smith wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>>  It seems like this might be a good strategy, presumably the directory is already made to hold mpi.h for MPI uni
>>> 
>>>> Perhaps its possible to change our installer to have mpiuni's mod file at  prefix/include/petsc/mpiuni/mpi.mod - [to enable reusing mpi.mod name ]
>> 
>>>>> 
>>        module petscmpi
>> #include <petscconf.h>
>> #include "petsc/finclude/petscsys.h"
>> #if defined(PETSC_HAVE_MPIUNI)
>>        use mpiuni
>> #else
>> #if defined(PETSC_HAVE_MPI_F90MODULE)
>>        use mpi
>> #else
>> #include "mpif.h"
>> #endif
>> #endif
>> <<<
>> 
>> There is also this use-case where there is no usable mpi.mod  - that petscmpi is currently
>> handling... Not sure how to deal with that..
>> 
>> Satish
>> 
>