[Mpi3-rma] RMA proposal 1 update
Underwood, Keith D
keith.d.underwood at intel.com
Tue May 25 10:35:09 CDT 2010
> 1) We didn't straw-vote on MPI_Accumulate_get, so this function might
> go. The removal would be very clean.
I'm with Rajeev on this one. I don't see the point. But, I think you knew that already ;-)
> 2) Should we allow MPI_NOOP in MPI_Accumulate (this does not make sense
> and is incorrect in my current proposal)
Agreed - it doesn't make sense to me either.
> 3) Should we allow MPI_REPLACE in
> (this would make sense and is allowed in the current proposal but we
> didn't talk about it in the group)
Yes, we should allow MPI_REPLACE - where else do we get a plain swap instead of a compare-and-swap?
More information about the mpiwg-rma