Takahiro, I fail to see the cases your patch addresses. I recognize I did not have the time to look over all the instances where we deal with persistent inactive requests, but at the first occurrence, the one in req_test.c line 68, the case you exhibit there is already covered by the test "request->req_state == OMPI_REQUEST_INACTIVE". I see similar checks in all the other test/wait files. Basically, it doesn't matter that we leave the last returned error code on an inactive request, as we always return MPI_STATUS_EMPTY in the status for such requests.
Thanks, george. On Oct 15, 2012, at 07:02 , "Kawashima, Takahiro" <t-kawash...@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote: > Hi Open MPI developers, > > How is my updated patch? > If there is an another concern, I'll try to update it. > >>>>> The bugs are: >>>>> >>>>> (1) MPI_SOURCE of MPI_Status for a null request must be MPI_ANY_SOURCE. >>>>> >>>>> (2) MPI_Status for an inactive request must be an empty status. >>>>> >>>>> (3) Possible BUS errors on sparc64 processors. >>>>> >>>>> r23554 fixed possible BUS errors on sparc64 processors. >>>>> But the fix seems to be insufficient. >>>>> >>>>> We should use OMPI_STATUS_SET macro for all user-supplied >>>>> MPI_Status objects. >>>> Regarding #3, see also a trac 3218. I'm putting a fix back today. Sorry >>>> for the delay. One proposed solution was extending the use of the >>>> OMPI_STATUS_SET macros, but I think the consensus was to fix the problem >>>> in the Fortran layer. Indeed, the Fortran layer already routinely >>>> converts between Fortran and C statuses. The problem was that we started >>>> introducing optimizations to bypass the Fortran-to-C conversion and that >>>> optimization was employed too liberally (e..g, in situations that would >>>> introduce the alignment errors you're describing). My patch will clean >>>> that up. I'll try to put it back in the next few hours. >>> >>> Sorry, I didn't notice the ticket 3218. >>> Now I've confirmed your commit r27403. >>> Your modification is better for my issue (3). >>> >>> With r27403, my patch for issue (1) and (2) needs modification. >>> I'll re-send modified patch in a few hours. >> >> The updated patch is attached. >> This patch addresses bugs (1) and (2) in my previous mail >> and fixes some typos in comments. > > Regards, > > Takahiro Kawashima, > MPI development team, > Fujitsu > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list > de...@open-mpi.org > http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
