Closed jdinan closed 4 years ago
Would folks be comfortable handling this as a document edit, so we can squeeze it into OpenSHMEM 1.5? This feels to me like an erratum, which seems fine to implement as a document edit. Also would like to hear preferences on option 1 vs 2 above.
Thanks @jdinan - I'm comfortable as a doc-edit, and (very slightly) prefer option 2 since it seems more explicit about what "with increasing integer values" means.
Option 2 actually seems a bit weird since the the bulleted list is introduced as follows:
The following semantics apply to the usage of these models:
However, this requirement has to do with how the library is implemented, not how it is used. I think option 1 makes the most sense (as a doc edit).
Issue
I don't think we specified that
SHMEM_THREAD_SINGLE < SHMEM_THREAD_FUNNELED < SHMEM_THREAD_SERIALIZED < SHMEM_THREAD_MULTIPLE
.Proposed change
Option 1:
Section 9.2:
Option 2:
Section 9.2, add to the bulleted list of semantics: