Jeff, With apologies if I have misunderstood your question. To clarify, the example Rajeev gave was forbidden in MPI-2. One could not have concurrent passive target access epochs, even if they accessed different targets. It is allowed in MPI-3. ~Jim. On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Jeff Hammond <[email protected]>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