jeff.science at gmail.com
Mon Mar 10 20:43:37 CDT 2014
How the hell can I do GA or SHMEM then? Roll my own mutexes and commit perf-suicide?
Sent from my iPhone
> On Mar 10, 2014, at 8:32 PM, Jim Dinan <james.dinan at gmail.com> wrote:
> You can't use replace and sum concurrently at a given target address.
>> On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 4:30 PM, Jeff Hammond <jeff.science at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Given the following, how do I use MPI_NO_OP, MPI_REPLACE and MPI_SUM
>> in accumulate/atomic operations in a standard-compliant way?
>> accumulate_ops — if set to same_op, the implementation will assume
>> that all concurrent accumulate calls to the same target address will
>> use the same operation. If set to same_op_no_op, then the
>> implementation will assume that all concurrent accumulate calls to the
>> same target address will use the same operation or MPI_NO_OP. This can
>> eliminate the need to protect access for certain operation types where
>> the hardware can guarantee atomicity. The default is same_op_no_op.
>> We discuss this before and the resolution was not satisfying to me.
>> Jeff Hammond
>> jeff.science at gmail.com
>> mpiwg-rma mailing list
>> mpiwg-rma at lists.mpi-forum.org
> mpiwg-rma mailing list
> mpiwg-rma at lists.mpi-forum.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the mpiwg-rma