[mpiwg-rma] RMA WG discussion 12/2014

[Jim Dinan]

So, users won't expect that the interface can remotely complete a small RMA
operation such that it overtakes a previously issued large RMA operation?

On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 2:02 PM, Jeff Hammond <jeff.science at gmail.com>
wrote:

> It seems only obvious that remote request completion only makes sense
> for large messages where individual completion makes sense.  I can
> think of numerous contexts where it does, especially in the limit of
> not being able to register an infinity of pages.
>
> Jeff
>
> On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 5:49 PM, Jim Dinan <james.dinan at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I think the argument against was that can be hard to get fine-grain,
> > per-operation remote completion, and harder still to do it efficiently.
> So,
> > we could end up with an interface that builds a false expectation where
> > users expect overlap that many implementations can't provide.
> >
> >  ~Jim.
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 2:38 AM, Jeff Hammond <jeff.science at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Barrett didn't have a good argument against these functions except
> >> argument count, as I recall. There was some debate as to whether
> nonblocking
> >> flush was better, albeit in an apples-to-oranges way.
> >>
> >> I think most people are just frustrated with the grossness of the corner
> >> we are painted into with RMA API. Pirate RMA is the natural consequence
> of
> >> past decisions. The other solution to the application's problem is
> >> overlapping windows, which would be only mildly awful if not for our
> >> inability to support just one memory model.
> >>
> >> Jeff
> >>
> >> Sent from my iPhone
> >>
> >> > On Nov 6, 2014, at 6:47 AM, "Underwood, Keith D"
> >> > <keith.d.underwood at intel.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > So, what, you're telling me I have to start attending again to give
> you
> >> > an appropriate amount of difficulty for some of these proposals?
> >> >
> >> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> >> From: mpiwg-rma [mailto:mpiwg-rma-bounces at lists.mpi-forum.org] On
> >> >> Behalf Of Jeff Hammond
> >> >> Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2014 12:39 PM
> >> >> To: MPI WG Remote Memory Access working group
> >> >> Subject: Re: [mpiwg-rma] RMA WG discussion 12/2014
> >> >>
> >> >> Pirate RMA (remote request completion - cannot remember ticket
> number)
> >> >> needs to be retired if WG is still not in favor. But then again,
> >> >> Barrett is gone :-
> >> >> )
> >> >>
> >> >> Nonblocking RMA epochs in your SC14 paper should be discussed. That
> >> >> looks
> >> >> promising. Can you create a ticket for it?
> >> >>
> >> >> Jeff
> >> >>
> >> >> Sent from my iPhone
> >> >>
> >> >>> On Nov 4, 2014, at 5:48 PM, William Gropp <wgropp at illinois.edu>
> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> The wiki page already has 397 and I added 460.  Note also that there
> >> >>> is a list
> >> >> of open tickets on that page; we should try to either adopt or retire
> >> >> the open
> >> >> ones.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Bill
> >> >>>
> >> >>>> On Nov 4, 2014, at 10:32 AM, Jeff Hammond <jeff.science at gmail.com>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> I would like to discuss
> >> >>>> https://svn.mpi-forum.org/trac/mpi-forum-web/ticket/397 and the
> >> >>>> closely related
> >> >>>> https://svn.mpi-forum.org/trac/mpi-forum-web/ticket/460 in San
> Jose.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Can we collect the other tickets of interest to people and ask
> Martin
> >> >>>> for the appropriate allocation of time?
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Thanks,
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Jeff
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> --
> >> >>>> Jeff Hammond
> >> >>>> jeff.science at gmail.com
> >> >>>> http://jeffhammond.github.io/
> >> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >> >>>> mpiwg-rma mailing list
> >> >>>> mpiwg-rma at lists.mpi-forum.org
> >> >>>> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-rma
> >> >>>
> >> >>> _______________________________________________
> >> >>> mpiwg-rma mailing list
> >> >>> mpiwg-rma at lists.mpi-forum.org
> >> >>> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-rma
> >> >> _______________________________________________
> >> >> mpiwg-rma mailing list
> >> >> mpiwg-rma at lists.mpi-forum.org
> >> >> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-rma
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > mpiwg-rma mailing list
> >> > mpiwg-rma at lists.mpi-forum.org
> >> > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-rma
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> mpiwg-rma mailing list
> >> mpiwg-rma at lists.mpi-forum.org
> >> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-rma
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > mpiwg-rma mailing list
> > mpiwg-rma at lists.mpi-forum.org
> > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-rma
>
>
>
> --
> Jeff Hammond
> jeff.science at gmail.com
> http://jeffhammond.github.io/
> _______________________________________________
> mpiwg-rma mailing list
> mpiwg-rma at lists.mpi-forum.org
> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-rma
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mpi-forum.org/pipermail/mpiwg-rma/attachments/20141112/8315542a/attachment-0001.html>