I don't see how you reach this conclusion. Based on my reading of the
standard, MPI_ERRHANDLER_NULL is a valid error handler defined as "no"
errorhandler. Kind of similar with MPI_REQUEST_NULL ...
Moreover, I don't agree with some of the other changes, more
specifically with the one related to the MPI_Request_get_status. Here
is a paragraph from the MPI 2.1 standard about MPI_Waitall page 59
line 24: "The list may contain null or inactive handles. The call sets
to empty the status of each such entry." This basically tells me that
the status of the MPI_REQUEST_NULL should be the empty status (defined
in the MPI standard) and not any kind of errors (i.e MPI_ERR_ARG).
On Feb 19, 2009, at 11:43 , Jeff Squyres wrote:
> On Feb 19, 2009, at 10:47 AM, George Bosilca wrote:
>> I fail to find anything about this on the MPI Standard.
> MPI doesn't define any errors, does it? :-) I think it falls into
> the category of "MPI tells you what to do" and doesn't define what
> happens if you don't do that. MPI_*_SET_ERRHANDLER says you have to
> pass an errhandler handle. If you pass an invalid one (to include
> NULL or MPI_ERRHANDLER_NULL), it's an undefined error.
>> For me passing the NULL error handle to any kind of set handler
>> function should not be an error. It should means that you prefer to
>> not have any error handler triggered on the object.
> You want MPI to have *no* error mechanism defined for a given
> communicator/file/window? That seems kinda broken. Indeed, what
> you describe sounds a lot like MPI_ERRORS_RETURN -- meaning that you
> *do* have to set something specifically to get the error handler to
> effectively be a no-op (not NULL).
> To be clear: MPI_ERRHANDLER_NULL is described as an invalid error
> Jeff Squyres
> Cisco Systems
> devel mailing list