[Mpi3-rma] [EXTERNAL] Re: MPI-3 UNIFIED model clarification
balaji at mcs.anl.gov
Sun Aug 4 19:32:09 CDT 2013
On 08/04/2013 06:57 PM, Barrett, Brian W wrote:
> Ah, ok. I did not interpret that paragraph that way. Since one-sided
> operations are explicitly not called out as being incoherent, I
> interpreted it as the one-sided operations must do the "right thing".
> But I can see your concern. Not sure what the right solution is: 1)
> fix the specification of separate to do the right thing for one-sided
> operations 2) loosen the unified specification to work in more places,
> or 3) add a third memory model. 1) has some non-cache coherent issues
> in my mind. 2) means we lose SHMEM-like semantics on those platforms,
> which greatly worries me. 3) might be the best option (ugh).
I agree (3) might be the best option. But I won't argue against (2)
either (I think some folks on the WG want that).
More information about the mpiwg-rma