[Mpi3-rma] current version of proposal

Barrett, Brian W bwbarre at sandia.gov
Wed Mar 2 13:48:26 CST 2011

On 3/2/11 9:47 AM, "James Dinan" <dinan at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:

>Hi Brian,
>When we state that accumulates with the same operation are
>non-conflicting, should I be interpreting this as CAS is only
>non-conflicting with other CAS operations?  This is a bit of a stretch
>since CAS doesn't take an op argument, but I suppose it's doable.  Some
>text to help the reader make this connection for CAS would definitely

CAS is defined as an accumulate operation (pg 1, ln 38--41), so yes, CAS
should be interpreted as a different operation than MPI_REPLACE or MPI_SUM
or...  I personally think this is obvious, but have no objection to an
additional sentence in the accumulate_ops info key specifying this.  I
believe that's the only place in the current text where operation
conflicts are discussed, but I could be wrong.


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

More information about the mpiwg-rma mailing list