{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/ofiwg/libfabric/issues/1645","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/ofiwg/libfabric/issues/1645/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/ofiwg/libfabric/issues/1645/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/ofiwg/libfabric/issues/1645/events","html_url":"https://github.com/ofiwg/libfabric/issues/1645","id":128222949,"number":1645,"title":"Clarify behavior of wait objects","user":{"login":"bturrubiates","id":2322856,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/2322856?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/bturrubiates","html_url":"https://github.com/bturrubiates","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bturrubiates/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bturrubiates/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bturrubiates/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bturrubiates/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bturrubiates/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bturrubiates/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bturrubiates/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bturrubiates/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bturrubiates/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/ofiwg/libfabric/labels/question","name":"question","color":"cc317c"}],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"milestone":null,"comments":7,"created_at":"2016-01-22T19:09:00Z","updated_at":"2016-01-27T19:31:33Z","closed_at":null,"body":"This is related to discussion that happened in #1533. The semantics of wait objects are not clear to me and the `fi_dgram_waitset` test and the comments in #1533 seem to suggest different behaviors.\r\n\r\n@shefty Could you comment on the information in [this](https://github.com/ofiwg/libfabric/files/101293/wait_objects.pdf) slideshow. I'd like to clarify which functions should reset the wait object, which use cases are valid, and determine if there is a risk for races. Once this is decided I can update the appropriate man pages. \r\n\r\n"},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/ofiwg/libfabric/issues/comments/175812404","html_url":"https://github.com/ofiwg/libfabric/issues/1645#issuecomment-175812404","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/ofiwg/libfabric/issues/1645","id":175812404,"user":{"login":"shefty","id":3967608,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/3967608?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/shefty","html_url":"https://github.com/shefty","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/shefty/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/shefty/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/shefty/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/shefty/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/shefty/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/shefty/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/shefty/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/shefty/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/shefty/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2016-01-27T19:31:33Z","updated_at":"2016-01-27T19:31:33Z","body":"I *think* this is a supportable feature, but I would hesitate to require it.  The problem is that the waitset may not use a single wait object.  On Linux, epoll could be used for fd's as a last resort.  But I don't know what you do for Solaris or FreeBSD or OS X.  I guess a provider could always just fail the call if it can't be supported.\r\n\r\nHonestly, I didn't realize that this was not documented.  I implemented it in the UDP provider.  It's probably worth at least adding to the man page.\r\n"}}