balaji at mcs.anl.gov
Fri Aug 26 02:35:30 CDT 2011
I have uploaded a new version of the document on the ticket. It corrects
the info argument problem and lists an item for discussion for the next
On 08/26/2011 02:18 AM, Pavan Balaji wrote:
> On 08/26/2011 02:12 AM, Supalov, Alexander wrote:
>> Thanks. The advice to implementers mentioned an Info argument (see
>> 23/6). There appears to be no MPI_Info argument in the syntax (see
>> 22/26). Is this a remnant of the ol'times, or a glint of the future?
>> Actually, having an MPI_Info here would be very tempting, as one
>> could, e.g., ask the new communicator ranks to be reordered to honour
>> cache hierarchy, or latency, etc. With the time we could then also
>> agree on some keys/effects common to all implementations.
> Oops, the info argument was always the plan. I somehow messed up the
> prototype. Thanks for catching it.
> We did have a detailed discussion on whether we can predefine some info
> arguments, but there was no consensus. So we decided to leave it as
> implementation specific. If you have any ideas, please feel free to
> propose them.
> -- Pavan
More information about the mpiwg-hybridpm