Got it. Thanks! From: "Balaji, Pavan" <[email protected]> Date: Friday, November 2, 2018 at 3:03 PM To: "Fujita, Hajime" <[email protected]> Cc: "Balaji, Pavan" <[email protected]>, MPI WG Remote Memory Access working group <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [mpiwg-rma] Default value of accumulate_ops info key The invite went out to the entire WG. I've attached it again as an ics file with this email. RMA WG recurring telecon Scheduled: Nov 5, 2018 at 2:00 PM to 3:00 PM To join the Meeting: https://bluejeans.com/173205081/3141592 To join via Room System: Video Conferencing System: bjn.vc -or-199.48.152.152 Meeting ID : 173205081 Participant Passcode : 3141592 To join via phone : 1) Dial: +1.408.317.9254 (US (San Jose)) +1.866.226.4650 (US Toll Free) (see all numbers - http://bluejeans.com/numbers) 2) Enter Conference ID : 173205081 3) Enter Participant Passcode : 3141592 -- Pavan

On Nov 2, 2018, at 2:37 PM, Fujita, Hajime <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi Pavan,

So the next meeting is at 11/5 (Mon) 2pm central? I don't see a calendar invite.

Thanks, Hajime

On 11/2/18, 12:11 PM, "mpiwg-rma on behalf of Balaji, Pavan via mpiwg-rma" <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote:

Hi Joseph,

I don't know about MPI-3.2, but if the Forum accepts the proposal, I believe we have started pushing out draft standards which can be used. Having said that, I don't know if MPI implementations will implement draft standards or wait till the final standard is out.

The last telecon was canceled. We have one more this coming Monday.

-- Pavan

...

On Nov 2, 2018, at 10:08 AM, Joseph Schuchart via mpiwg-rma <[email protected]> wrote:

All,

While working on a code that makes use of MPI accumulate operations, I stumbled upon reading the description of the `accumulate_ops` info key. The standard (v3.1) states "The default is same_op_no_op." My interpretation is that this is the value used if the info key is not specified (based on my understanding of the term `default`). How would I specify my intent to use any accumulate operation? From looking at one implementation, the default is to expect the use of any operation but that seems inconsistent and confusing for users.

I remember the discussion of a proposal for v4.0 to add `any_op` in a recent phone conference but I couldn't find that proposal anywhere online. Would it be possible to fix this issue in v3.2 by removing the sentence quoted above?

On another note: Based on the invitation sent out by Pavan Balaji I tried to join the biweekly phone conference on Monday last week (10/22) at 2pm central time but the conference room was empty. Is this still the current schedule? Maybe I just got the timezones messed up?

Many thanks in advance, Joseph Schuchart -- Dipl.-Inf. Joseph Schuchart High Performance Computing Center Stuttgart (HLRS) Nobelstr. 19 D-70569 Stuttgart

Tel.: +49(0)711-68565890 Fax: +49(0)711-6856832 E-Mail: [email protected] _______________________________________________ mpiwg-rma mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo/mpiwg-rma

_______________________________________________ mpiwg-rma mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo/mpiwg-rma