Delivered-To: mpifrm-mpi-comments-outgoing@XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
X-Original-To: mpifrm-mpi-comments@XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Delivered-To: mpifrm-mpi-comments@XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
X-Greylist: delayed 1071 seconds by postgrey-1.21 at mailbouncer.mcs.anl.gov; Wed, 04 Jan 2006 07:43:47 CST
From: Lars Schneidenbach <lschneid@XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX>
To: mpi-comments@XXXXXXXXXXXXX
Subject: One-sided communications example issue
Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 14:21:36 +0100
User-Agent: KMail/1.7.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed;
  boundary="nextPart9803027.3kEe9FRZUe";
  protocol="application/pgp-signature";
  micalg=pgp-sha1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20030616-p10 (Debian) at mailbouncer.mcs.anl.gov
Sender: owner-mpi-comments@XXXXXXXXXXXXX
Precedence: bulk
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20030616-p10 (Debian) at mailbouncer.mcs.anl.gov
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.6 tagged_above=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50
X-Spam-Level: *

text under discussion: Example 6.10, page 135/136

Hi,

while digging into details of MPI2 one-sided communications, I tried to 
understand the examples (Section 6.5).  I think there's an issue with 
example 6.10 (page 135):

At page 136 Line 24 the code runs a check on A1 inside the access epoch 
of win1. As far as I understand, the content of A1 is not correct until 
MPI_Win_complete(win1) returns in line 26.

I had a look to the errata-documents and found nothing about that.

I think the example does not work the way it should work. Can you tell 
me if I'm right or wrong?

Regards
Lars Schneidenbach

-- 
 Dipl.Inf. Lars Schneidenbach         lschneid@XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
 Universität Potsdam                      Tel : +49 331/977 3123
 Inst. f. Informatik, Postfach 90 03 27   Fax : +49 331/977 3122
 D-14439 Potsdam, Germany


c:\cygwin\home\gropp\eudora\attach\One-sided communications exa One-sided communications exampl