[mpiwg-persistence] Summary of Semantics for Partitioned Communication Operations

[HOLMES Daniel]

Hi Puri,

Thanks for this - a great way to provoke some progress (no pun intended).

I would suggest: move the rows dealing with MPI_PREADY and MPI_PARRIVED between MPI_START and MPI_WAIT, i.e. in the approximate calling order.

Also, I would add “ic” for the new MPI_PREADY, MPI_PARRIVED, etc procedures - because the operation is definitely incomplete at the point in time they are called, during the time interval of their entire execution, and at the point in time they return - there is no possibility they could be completing or freeing procedures.

What are the other footnotes: 7, 9, and 14? (I could look them up but I’d have to choose the same draft version as you because the numbering changed recently.)

Cheers,
Dan.
—
Dr Daniel Holmes PhD
Architect (HPC Research)
d.holmes at epcc.ed.ac.uk<mailto:d.holmes at epcc.ed.ac.uk>
Phone: +44 (0) 131 651 3465
Mobile: +44 (0) 7940 524 088
Address: Room 2.09, Bayes Centre, 47 Potterrow, Central Area, Edinburgh, EH8 9BT
—
The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
—

On 15 Jul 2020, at 18:24, Bangalore, Purushotham via mpiwg-persistence <mpiwg-persistence at lists.mpi-forum.org<mailto:mpiwg-persistence at lists.mpi-forum.org>> wrote:

<MPI-semantics-appendix.xlsx>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mpi-forum.org/pipermail/mpiwg-persistence/attachments/20200715/3af103a5/attachment.html>