On Jan 10, 2014, at 10:57 AM, George Bosilca <bosilca_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> This is not the same example as before. This example is correct, it does not rely on the send being eagerly completed.
I know. :-)
Just to tie up this thread for the web archives:
>> My point (which I guess I didn't make well) is that COMM_FREE is collective, which we all know does not necessarily mean synchronizing. If hcoll teardown is going to add synchronization, there could be situations that might be dangerous (if OMPI doesn't already synchronize during COMM_FREE, which is why I asked the question).
For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/