[Mpi3-rma] MPI-3 UNIFIED model clarification

Pavan Balaji balaji at mcs.anl.gov
Mon Jul 29 15:33:03 CDT 2013

On 07/29/2013 03:05 PM, Sur, Sayantan wrote:
> I agree with the sentiment, also with the implementation issue of
> UNIFIED with multi-rail. I'm not certain that a model exists in
> between UNIFIED and SEPARATE. Either you are able to observe changes
> in memory without further MPI calls, or not. Pavan do you have a
> specific model in mind?

Yes.  I'd like a model where the user has to explicitly do a WIN_SYNC at 
the target.  I agree that UNIFIED's current definition is stronger than 
this.  Hence the request for either a new memory model or to weaken 
UNIFIED's definition.

  -- Pavan

Pavan Balaji

More information about the mpiwg-rma mailing list