At the upcoming meeting, do we want to have an official reading of the proposal or do we want to just run both proposals by the Forum (i.e., socialize the ideas) first and have the official reading next time? Rajeev

-----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Underwood, Keith D Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2010 4:28 PM To: MPI 3.0 Remote Memory Access working group Subject: Re: [Mpi3-rma] Proposal 2

What we don't have for proposal 1 yet is an implementation. Brian had indicated that he could create an interesting MPI_Win_alloc() implementation, but I don't know his timeline for doing that. Do we have other implementation volunteers? These seem easy, since it should be a copy and paste of code from unlock:

MPI_Win_flush() MPI_Win_flushall()

These seem a little harder, since they involve some actual new code:

MPI_Win_lockall() MPI_Win_unlockall() MPI_Get_Accumulate() MPI_Compare_and_swap()

Keith

...

-----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:mpi3-rma- [email protected]] On Behalf Of Rajeev Thakur Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2010 3:22 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [Mpi3-rma] Proposal 2

There are less than 3 weeks to go before the next Forum meeting. Proposal 1 is more or less there, but we don't have a Proposal 2. We got a bit bogged down in allflushall, but other than that is there consensus on other topics to create a Proposal 2? Allflushall can be included in there and debated separately (with a time limit :-)).

Rajeev

_______________________________________________ mpi3-rma mailing list [email protected] http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi3-rma

_______________________________________________ mpi3-rma mailing list [email protected] http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi3-rma