[Mpi3-rma] Reference implementation / October vote

Underwood, Keith D keith.d.underwood at intel.com
Tue Oct 11 17:50:28 CDT 2011

I would certainly argue that the MPI_LOCK_ALL() question is not one that should derail the proposal.  It works just fine for the purpose it was designed for.  There are certainly less scalable ways that it COULD be used, but, then, how is that different from Alltoallv?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: mpi3-rma-bounces at lists.mpi-forum.org [mailto:mpi3-rma-
> bounces at lists.mpi-forum.org] On Behalf Of Barrett, Brian W
> Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 6:45 PM
> To: MPI 3.0 Remote Memory Access working group
> Subject: [Mpi3-rma] Reference implementation / October vote
> All -
> Given the agenda, have we officially punted on a vote in October?  This
> seems bad to me unless we're going to start over; we have an
> implementation and our other requirements are met.  If we're going to
> have
> a vote, we need to announce the implementation today/tomorrow.  The
> chapter may not be perfect, but it's easily fixed by some very short
> additions in a follow-on ticket.  Sorry I couldn't make the meeting
> Monday, but Torsten scheduled it while I was hosting a seminar speaker,
> which is one of those things I can't get out of...
> Brian
> --
>   Brian W. Barrett
>   Dept. 1423: Scalable System Software
>   Sandia National Laboratories
> _______________________________________________
> mpi3-rma mailing list
> mpi3-rma at lists.mpi-forum.org
> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi3-rma

More information about the mpiwg-rma mailing list