[Mpi3-rma] current version of proposal

Barrett, Brian W bwbarre at sandia.gov
Wed Mar 2 10:30:05 CST 2011

I agree with most of the edits, but not the move from "accumulate
operations" to "atomic operations".  I understand the reluctance to call
compare-and-swap an accumulate operation, but we used "accumulate
operations" so that we wouldn't run into any semantic changes to the
greater document.  This was the same reason we didn't make rational
overlap semantics for put/get.  If we're going to change our minds and
make the change to accumulate operations, but not change put/get
semantics, that seems rather odd.


On 3/1/11 1:54 PM, "James Dinan" <dinan at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:

>Hi All,
>I did a read through and attached my edits.  I also scanned in the
>edited document and typed up the edits so you don't have to interpret my
>scribbled notes.  I *think* there might have been one or two pages that
>were flipped over when I scanned it, so keep an eye out.
>A couple of those edits are non-trivial, so feel free to move anything
>that should be discussed to the mailing list.
>For example, I suggested merging MPI_Win_query into a window attribute -
>we've remove the datatype and op from the call, so now it should work
>cleanly as an attribute.
>  ~Jim.
>On 02/28/2011 03:43 PM, Torsten Hoefler wrote:
>> Hello all,
>> I updated the version again (hopefully for a last time) with Brian's
>> cleanup of the examples (Brian, I edited the style a bit). See
>> All the Best,
>>    Torsten

  Brian W. Barrett
  Dept. 1423: Scalable System Software
  Sandia National Laboratories

More information about the mpiwg-rma mailing list