[mpiwg-ft] Proposal Feedback

Aurélien Bouteiller bouteill at icl.utk.edu
Fri Feb 21 17:33:42 CST 2014

Le 21 févr. 2014 à 17:54, Jim Dinan <james.dinan at gmail.com> a écrit :

> Hi All,
> In reviewing the proposal, a couple questions/comments came up:
> (1) Are the semantics for the MPI probe operations (probe, iprobe, mprobe) well defined?  Including when MPI_ANY_SOURCE is used?
Yes, they are exactly the same as for normal recv operations. We had a WG phone call issue on mprobe alone, sometime last september,  to verify that it was not problematic. 

> (2) For comm_shrink, what happens when the remote group in an intercommunicator becomes empty?  Is it valid to get back an intercommunicator with an empty remote group?
That’s a pretty bizarre case. It is to be noted that the semantic for the shrink is well defined: the outcome is the same as if the user had called split with colors set to MPI_UNDEFINED at all remote group processes.  From the definition of SPLIT stated page 247, the well defined outcome is that MPI_COMM_NULL is returned when a color is used on only one side of the intercomm. 

> (3) In 15.2 (pg. 594:21), can we replace the sentence "always complete in a finite amount of time" with the simpler "eventually complete”?
I believe the original formulation carries the argument more visibly by being pedantic; but if you feel strongly about it, I don't.  

>  ~Jim.
> _______________________________________________
> mpiwg-ft mailing list
> mpiwg-ft at lists.mpi-forum.org
> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-ft

More information about the mpiwg-ft mailing list