public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "burnus at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/25829] [F2003] Asynchronous IO support
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 09:11:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-25829-4-ducDzAQRTU@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-25829-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25829

--- Comment #21 from Tobias Burnus <burnus at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-04-15 09:10:56 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #19)
> A brute-force method would be to add a __sync_synchronize

Actually, this idea does not work properly - neither for INQUIRE(...,PENDING=)
nor for ASYNCHRONOUS with MPI 3. (Cf. link below)

(In reply to comment #20)
> If ASYNCHRONOUS expands to volatile, no barrier should be necessary.

Well, VOLATILE has the wrong semantics, i.e. it will only partially solve the
problem. Additionally, you create huge missed-optimization issues.

I have now asked at GCC@ (and fortran@) for some suggestions:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2011-04/msg00143.html

(There is currently also a vivid discussion on J3's interop and MPI Forum's
MPI3-Fortran mailing lists about ASYNCHRONOUS and nonblocking MPI calls.)


  parent reply	other threads:[~2011-04-15  9:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <bug-25829-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2011-03-04 18:08 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-03-04 18:12 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-04-15  9:11 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2011-07-13  9:25 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-07-13 13:16 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
2006-01-17 21:53 [Bug fortran/25829] New: " jb at gcc dot gnu dot org
2006-01-17 23:33 ` [Bug fortran/25829] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-02-17  1:20 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-02-17  5:02 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-02-23 16:49 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-04-05 22:19 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-04-05 22:24 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-04-05 22:35 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-04-07 22:07 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-04-07 22:09 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-04-07 22:12 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-04-10 21:23 ` dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-04-11 15:26 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-10-28 22:03 ` jb at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-12-11 22:28 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-12-11 22:29 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-01-08 10:11 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-01-08 10:42 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-07-13 17:34 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=bug-25829-4-ducDzAQRTU@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \
    --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).