From: Richard Treumann Date: January 31, 2008 7:28:54 AM CST To: "Mailing list for discussion of MPI 2.1" Subject: Re: [mpi-21] Ballot 4 - Re: Request for interpretation Reply-To: "Mailing list for discussion of MPI 2.1" Your wording works for me Rolf. -- Thanks( ( ( Dick Treumann - MPI Team/TCEM ( IBM Systems & Technology Group( Dept 0lva / MS P963 -- 2455 South Road -- Poughkeepsie, NY 12601( Tele (845) 433-7846 Fax (845) 433-8363( ( ( mpi-21-bounces@XXXXXXXXXXX wrote on 01/31/2008 05:25:46 AM:( ( > I try to summarize all 3 replies in one proposal:( > ( > ___________________________________( > ( > Proposal:( > MPI 2.0, Sect. 4.10 Info Objects, page 43, line 38-40 read:( > If a function does not recognize a key, ( > it will ignore it, unless otherwise specified.( > If an implementation recognizes a key but does not recognize ( > the format of the corresponding value, the result is undefined.( > but should read:( > An implementation must support info objects as caches for arbitrary( > (key, value) pairs, regardless of whether it recognizes the pairs.( > Each MPI function which takes hints in the form of an MPI_Info must( > be prepared to ignore any key it does not recognize.( > ( > Add after MPI 2.0, Sect. 4.10 Info Objects, page 44, line 22 a new( > paragraph:( > Advice to implementors.( > Although in MPI functions that take hints in form of an MPI_Info( > (e.g., in process creation and management, one-sided communication, ( > or parallel file I/O), an implementation must be prepared to ignore ( > keys that it does not recognize, for the purpose of MPI_INFO_GET_NKEYS, ( > MPI_INFO_GET_NTHKEY, MPI_INFO_GET_VALUELEN, and MPI_INFO_GET, the ( > implementation must retain all (key,value) pairs so that layered ( > functionality can also use the Info object.( > (End of advice to implementors.)( > _____________________________( > Rationale for this clarification:( > ( > The MPI-2.0 text allowed that also MPI_INFO_DELETE, MPI_INFO_SET,( > MPI_INFO_GET, and MPI_INFO_DUP could ignore (key,value) pairs( > that are not recognized in routines in other chapters that( > take hints with info arguments.( > The proposed clarification is necessary when we assume, that ( > layered implementation of parts of the MPI-2 standard should ( > be possible and may use the MPI_Info objects for their needs.( > This was a goal of the MPI-2 Forum and the MPI-2.0 specification.( > ___________________________________( > ( > Bronis, for me, your wording "an MPI implementation may restrict" was( > in conflict with the rest of the advice. I hope the formulation above( > is also okay. It is based on the new wording from you and Dick in first ( > part of the proposal.( > ( > Best regards( > Rolf( > ( > ( > Dr. Rolf Rabenseifner . . . . . . . . . .. email rabenseifn _______________________________________________ mpi-21 mailing list mpi-21@XXXXXXXXXXX http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/mpi-21