[Mpi3-ft] New RMA functions

Pavan Balaji balaji at mcs.anl.gov
Thu Feb 24 12:24:10 CST 2011

The sync operations are all for remote completion. So, this is not an 
issue as far as RMA operations are concerned. If you can make do with 
the return codes, that'll be great.

  -- Pavan

On 02/24/2011 11:04 AM, Darius Buntinas wrote:
> Would we need to add a status object to the sync operations?  We should be able to use the return code.
> We may have issues with operations that complete locally and return MPI_SUCCESS, but then later fail when they actually perform the communication, but we already have this issue with regular sends.
> I don't believe that we are making (or can make, without requiring every operation to be synchronous) the guarantee that if an operation returns MPI_SUCCESS that it was successfully delivered in the presence of a permanent failure (e.g., permanent network bisection or process failure).
> -d
> On Feb 24, 2011, at 9:53 AM, Pavan Balaji wrote:
>> 1. The existing PUT/GET/ACCUMULATE operations which are from MPI-2.2. They will not take a request operand, and we want to retain it that way to minimize the performance overhead. Synchronization calls (such as closing an epoch or flush/flushall) wait for their completion, but they do not return a status object currently. Adding a status object to the synchronization calls is an option, though that'll require extensive changes. But adding them to the PUT/GET/ACCUMULATE operations themselves would beat the purpose of low-overhead communication, so that might not be doable.
> _______________________________________________
> mpi3-ft mailing list
> mpi3-ft at lists.mpi-forum.org
> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi3-ft

Pavan Balaji

More information about the mpiwg-ft mailing list