[Mpi3-ft] one sided

[Pavan Balaji]

FYI, you cannot "require" some behavior from MPI through an info 
argument. It is perfectly legitimate for the MPI implementation to 
completely ignore any info arguments passed. They are just user hints.

  -- Pavan

On 10/19/2011 07:59 AM, Josh Hursey wrote:
> Let's be sure to talk about this on today's call. I have some other
> one-sided notes that I would like to go over as well.
>
> It would be fairly easy to support both modes since the MPI_Win_create
> operation takes an info argument. We could define a key (similar to
> what they have done for other operations) that either loosens or
> tightens the semantics depending on what the default behavior should
> be.
>
> I think it is ok to have a non-synchronizing option, just as long as
> we have clear semantics for when the window is not created at all
> processes due to some process failure - or if the window is always
> created regardless of emerging failure then we might avoid this issue,
> but that might require some additional clarification.
>
> Thanks,
> Josh
>
> On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 4:11 AM, Supalov, Alexander
> <alexander.supalov at intel.com>  wrote:
>> Thanks. Why not having two calls or modes of operation to cover both?
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: mpi3-ft-bounces at lists.mpi-forum.org [mailto:mpi3-ft-bounces at lists.mpi-forum.org] On Behalf Of Darius Buntinas
>> Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2011 9:57 PM
>> To: MPI 3.0 Fault Tolerance and Dynamic Process Control working Group
>> Subject: [Mpi3-ft] one sided
>>
>>
>> I got some feedback from Jim and Pavan on the one-sided section.  One thing Jim pointed out was that we don't want to make window creation synchronizing, and the fail-or-succeed everywhere requirement would do that.
>>
>> If we say that window creation should not fail due to failed processes, that would accomplish the same thing:  If a window is created by a correct program, then it will succeed at all live processes.  Note that if an incorrect program specifies invalid parameters then the window creation may fail at some processes and succeed at others, but this is what we already have today.
>>
>> However, it's possible that some implementations cannot satisfy this requirement because, e.g., they do collectives as part of the operation.  So maybe we should have two options:
>>
>>   Either:
>>     window creation won't fail because if failed processes
>>   or
>>     window creation will either succeed or fail everywhere and if window creation fails at
>>     any process it fails at every process
>>
>> -d
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> mpi3-ft mailing list
>> mpi3-ft at lists.mpi-forum.org
>> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi3-ft
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Intel GmbH
>> Dornacher Strasse 1
>> 85622 Feldkirchen/Muenchen, Deutschland
>> Sitz der Gesellschaft: Feldkirchen bei Muenchen
>> Geschaeftsfuehrer: Douglas Lusk, Peter Gleissner, Hannes Schwaderer
>> Registergericht: Muenchen HRB 47456
>> Ust.-IdNr./VAT Registration No.: DE129385895
>> Citibank Frankfurt a.M. (BLZ 502 109 00) 600119052
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> mpi3-ft mailing list
>> mpi3-ft at lists.mpi-forum.org
>> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi3-ft
>>
>>
>
>
>

-- 
Pavan Balaji
http://www.mcs.anl.gov/~balaji