<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto"><div>I don't know what RMA users other than I will expect. But advice to users might be useful to, you know, advise users as to what reasonable expectations are :-)</div><div><br></div><div>Jeff<br><br>Sent from my iPhone</div><div><br>On Nov 12, 2014, at 12:59 PM, Jim Dinan <<a href="mailto:james.dinan@gmail.com">james.dinan@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><div dir="ltr">So, users won't expect that the interface can remotely complete a small RMA operation such that it overtakes a previously issued large RMA operation?</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 2:02 PM, Jeff Hammond <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jeff.science@gmail.com" target="_blank">jeff.science@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">It seems only obvious that remote request completion only makes sense<br>
for large messages where individual completion makes sense. I can<br>
think of numerous contexts where it does, especially in the limit of<br>
not being able to register an infinity of pages.<br>
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
Jeff<br>
</font></span><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 5:49 PM, Jim Dinan <<a href="mailto:james.dinan@gmail.com">james.dinan@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> I think the argument against was that can be hard to get fine-grain,<br>
> per-operation remote completion, and harder still to do it efficiently. So,<br>
> we could end up with an interface that builds a false expectation where<br>
> users expect overlap that many implementations can't provide.<br>
><br>
> ~Jim.<br>
><br>
> On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 2:38 AM, Jeff Hammond <<a href="mailto:jeff.science@gmail.com">jeff.science@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> Barrett didn't have a good argument against these functions except<br>
>> argument count, as I recall. There was some debate as to whether nonblocking<br>
>> flush was better, albeit in an apples-to-oranges way.<br>
>><br>
>> I think most people are just frustrated with the grossness of the corner<br>
>> we are painted into with RMA API. Pirate RMA is the natural consequence of<br>
>> past decisions. The other solution to the application's problem is<br>
>> overlapping windows, which would be only mildly awful if not for our<br>
>> inability to support just one memory model.<br>
>><br>
>> Jeff<br>
>><br>
>> Sent from my iPhone<br>
>><br>
>> > On Nov 6, 2014, at 6:47 AM, "Underwood, Keith D"<br>
>> > <<a href="mailto:keith.d.underwood@intel.com">keith.d.underwood@intel.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>> ><br>
>> > So, what, you're telling me I have to start attending again to give you<br>
>> > an appropriate amount of difficulty for some of these proposals?<br>
>> ><br>
>> >> -----Original Message-----<br>
>> >> From: mpiwg-rma [mailto:<a href="mailto:mpiwg-rma-bounces@lists.mpi-forum.org">mpiwg-rma-bounces@lists.mpi-forum.org</a>] On<br>
>> >> Behalf Of Jeff Hammond<br>
>> >> Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2014 12:39 PM<br>
>> >> To: MPI WG Remote Memory Access working group<br>
>> >> Subject: Re: [mpiwg-rma] RMA WG discussion 12/2014<br>
>> >><br>
>> >> Pirate RMA (remote request completion - cannot remember ticket number)<br>
>> >> needs to be retired if WG is still not in favor. But then again,<br>
>> >> Barrett is gone :-<br>
>> >> )<br>
>> >><br>
>> >> Nonblocking RMA epochs in your SC14 paper should be discussed. That<br>
>> >> looks<br>
>> >> promising. Can you create a ticket for it?<br>
>> >><br>
>> >> Jeff<br>
>> >><br>
>> >> Sent from my iPhone<br>
>> >><br>
>> >>> On Nov 4, 2014, at 5:48 PM, William Gropp <<a href="mailto:wgropp@illinois.edu">wgropp@illinois.edu</a>> wrote:<br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>> The wiki page already has 397 and I added 460. Note also that there<br>
>> >>> is a list<br>
>> >> of open tickets on that page; we should try to either adopt or retire<br>
>> >> the open<br>
>> >> ones.<br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>> Bill<br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>>> On Nov 4, 2014, at 10:32 AM, Jeff Hammond <<a href="mailto:jeff.science@gmail.com">jeff.science@gmail.com</a>><br>
>> >> wrote:<br>
>> >>>><br>
>> >>>> I would like to discuss<br>
>> >>>> <a href="https://svn.mpi-forum.org/trac/mpi-forum-web/ticket/397" target="_blank">https://svn.mpi-forum.org/trac/mpi-forum-web/ticket/397</a> and the<br>
>> >>>> closely related<br>
>> >>>> <a href="https://svn.mpi-forum.org/trac/mpi-forum-web/ticket/460" target="_blank">https://svn.mpi-forum.org/trac/mpi-forum-web/ticket/460</a> in San Jose.<br>
>> >>>><br>
>> >>>> Can we collect the other tickets of interest to people and ask Martin<br>
>> >>>> for the appropriate allocation of time?<br>
>> >>>><br>
>> >>>> Thanks,<br>
>> >>>><br>
>> >>>> Jeff<br>
>> >>>><br>
>> >>>> --<br>
>> >>>> Jeff Hammond<br>
>> >>>> <a href="mailto:jeff.science@gmail.com">jeff.science@gmail.com</a><br>
>> >>>> <a href="http://jeffhammond.github.io/" target="_blank">http://jeffhammond.github.io/</a><br>
>> >>>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> >>>> mpiwg-rma mailing list<br>
>> >>>> <a href="mailto:mpiwg-rma@lists.mpi-forum.org">mpiwg-rma@lists.mpi-forum.org</a><br>
>> >>>> <a href="http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-rma" target="_blank">http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-rma</a><br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> >>> mpiwg-rma mailing list<br>
>> >>> <a href="mailto:mpiwg-rma@lists.mpi-forum.org">mpiwg-rma@lists.mpi-forum.org</a><br>
>> >>> <a href="http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-rma" target="_blank">http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-rma</a><br>
>> >> _______________________________________________<br>
>> >> mpiwg-rma mailing list<br>
>> >> <a href="mailto:mpiwg-rma@lists.mpi-forum.org">mpiwg-rma@lists.mpi-forum.org</a><br>
>> >> <a href="http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-rma" target="_blank">http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-rma</a><br>
>> > _______________________________________________<br>
>> > mpiwg-rma mailing list<br>
>> > <a href="mailto:mpiwg-rma@lists.mpi-forum.org">mpiwg-rma@lists.mpi-forum.org</a><br>
>> > <a href="http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-rma" target="_blank">http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-rma</a><br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> mpiwg-rma mailing list<br>
>> <a href="mailto:mpiwg-rma@lists.mpi-forum.org">mpiwg-rma@lists.mpi-forum.org</a><br>
>> <a href="http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-rma" target="_blank">http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-rma</a><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> mpiwg-rma mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:mpiwg-rma@lists.mpi-forum.org">mpiwg-rma@lists.mpi-forum.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-rma" target="_blank">http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-rma</a><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
--<br>
Jeff Hammond<br>
<a href="mailto:jeff.science@gmail.com">jeff.science@gmail.com</a><br>
<a href="http://jeffhammond.github.io/" target="_blank">http://jeffhammond.github.io/</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
mpiwg-rma mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:mpiwg-rma@lists.mpi-forum.org">mpiwg-rma@lists.mpi-forum.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-rma" target="_blank">http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-rma</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>
</div></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><div><span>_______________________________________________</span><br><span>mpiwg-rma mailing list</span><br><span><a href="mailto:mpiwg-rma@lists.mpi-forum.org">mpiwg-rma@lists.mpi-forum.org</a></span><br><span><a href="http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-rma">http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-rma</a></span></div></blockquote></body></html>