> 1. It seems like an issue should be opened about the problem that the 
> FI_SOURCE value
> is lost when calling fi_cq_readerr, want me to do it?

Sure - I've made a note to myself to try to address this for either the 1.8 or 
1.9 release.

> 2. You've mentioned that the sockets provider is deprecated.   Could you 
> update the
> feature matrix web page to say that, so that others don't spend a lot of time 
> debugging
> a provider that won't get fixed?

Yes

> 3. You said:
> 
> > By the time FI_MULTI_RECV is set on a completion, no additional completions 
> > will be
> generated for that buffer.
> > At least that is how is should work.  If not, this sounds like a bug in the 
> > provider.
> Error completions should be
> > reported in order with non-error completions.
> 
> I agree with you entirely.   Neither sockets nor gni work this way, the 
> FI_MULTI_RECV
> bit for a buffer can be seen by the application before all CQEs and/or errors 
> have been
> seen for that buffer.  And error completions are always returned before any 
> CQE
> completions, out of order.   I will open an issue against gni for this.   I 
> have not
> checked any of the other providers.

Most of the other providers use the utility code for completions, so I think 
they're okay.

- Sean
_______________________________________________
ofiwg mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openfabrics.org/mailman/listinfo/ofiwg

Reply via email to