Which tests are you referring to?
On Jun 16, 2008, at 11:09 AM, George Bosilca wrote:
On Jun 16, 2008, at 10:58 AM, Jeff Squyres wrote:
I completely agree that we should follow the standard to the
greatest possible extend, but then at least we should have our
test codes following the sam
On Jun 16, 2008, at 10:58 AM, Jeff Squyres wrote:
I completely agree that we should follow the standard to the
greatest possible extend, but then at least we should have our test
codes following the same guidelines. It doesn't means I volunteer
for anything ...
I'm not sure what you mean
On Jun 9, 2008, at 12:25 PM, George Bosilca wrote:
Please search through the archives of this list; as Brian mentioned,
this topic has come up several times before. It's fairly boring to
keep repeating the same arguments; we have lots of *new* things to
argue about these days. ;-)
Unfortunat
On Jun 9, 2008, at 11:50 AM, Jeff Squyres wrote:
Please search through the archives of this list; as Brian mentioned,
this topic has come up several times before. It's fairly boring to
keep repeating the same arguments; we have lots of *new* things to
argue about these days. ;-)
Unfortunate
George --
I think the following sentence is pretty clear:
"This field may be updated only by the functions in Section 3.7.5
which return multiple statuses."
The intent is that you should get the error value back from the return
value of the function, not the status. You only need this fie
Rainer,
The snippet from the MPICH2 is irrelevant to the current discussion.
It only concern set empty status. A quick grep in the MPICH2 source
code (find . -name "*.[ch]" -exec grep -Hn MPI_ERROR {} \;) shows that
they ALWAYS set the MPI_ERROR field in the status if they detect
somethin
Hi,
that's one of the mysteries of the MPI-1 standard.
Nevertheless, we should be std. conforming. Therefore, I included the comment
and omitted the setting of .MPI_ERROR.
MPIch2 does not for the same reasons. Therefore I would say the tests are
wrong.
With best regards,
Rainer
PS: e.g. from
Here is what the MPI standard state:
"In general, message passing calls do not modify the value of the
error code field of status variables. This field may be updated only
by the functions in Section 3.7.5 which return multiple statuses. The
field is updated if and only if such function ret
Since this is not the first or second time we've had the discussion in
the group, perhaps a comment in the code would be a good idea :).
Brian
On Jun 6, 2008, at 9:58 AM, Jeff Squyres wrote:
George --
This is not correct. Note the comment that says to see MPI-1.2
section 3.2.5 page 22 (I t
George --
This is not correct. Note the comment that says to see MPI-1.2
section 3.2.5 page 22 (I think it means MPI-1.1). It says:
"In general, message passing calls do not modify the value of the
error code field of status variables. This field may be updated only
by the functions in
10 matches
Mail list logo
