Those are two access epochs on the same rank (say rank 0), as defined by the paragraph above that sentence (pg 437, ln 28). On Aug 19, 2013, at 2:52 PM, Jeff Hammond wrote:
you mean lock at those ranks, not by those ranks? those aren't conflicting so i don't see the issue. maybe i am a dolt though.
jeff
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 2:44 PM, Rajeev Thakur <[email protected]> wrote: Did we make any change in MPI 3.0 to allow nesting of MPI_Win_lock calls? For example,
Win_lock(rank 1) Win_lock(rank 2)
Win_unlock(rank 2) Win_unlock(rank 1)
I can't find the text we added or deleted to allow this.
But I do see text that disallows this: pg 437, ln 28: "Distinct access epochs for win at the same process must be disjoint."
Rajeev
_______________________________________________ mpi3-rma mailing list [email protected] http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi3-rma
-- Jeff Hammond [email protected] _______________________________________________ mpi3-rma mailing list [email protected] http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi3-rma