At a high level, it seems reasonable to me. I am not familiar enough with
the sendi code, however, to have a strong opinion either way.
Brian
On Mon, 23 Feb 2009, Jeff Squyres wrote:
Sounds reasonable to me. George / Brian?
On Feb 21, 2009, at 2:11 AM, Eugene Loh wrote:
What: Eliminate the "descriptor" argument from sendi functions.
Why: The only thing this argument is used for is so that the sendi
function can allocate a descriptor in the event that the "send" cannot
complete. But, in that case, the sendi reverts to the PML, where there is
already code to allocate a descriptor. So, each sendi function (in each
BTL that has a sendi function) must have code that is already in the PML
anyhow. This is unnecessary extra coding and not clean design.
Where: In each BTL that has a sendi function (only three, and there are
not all used) and in the function prototype and at the PML calling site.
When: I'd like to incorporate this in the shared-memory latency work I'm
doing that we're targetting for 1.3.x.
Timeout: Feb 27.
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
de...@open-mpi.org
http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
