On Mar 7, 2013, at 7:37 PM, George Bosilca <bosi...@icl.utk.edu> wrote:
> An example will be a memory region without a predefined size, that I > manipulate as opal_list_item_t. This fragment gets allocated when it's size > is know, then gets OBJ_CONSTRUCT'ed and then used. The reference count is > playing its role, when nobody is using the object anymore, it will be > automatically released. With the change you propose such usage will be > prohibited. Ah, ok -- are you saying to do the following: myobj = malloc(...); OBJ_CONSTRUCT(myobj, ...); ? If so, yes, I agree, #1 would disallow that [valid] use case. And we wouldn't want to disallow that. But that's ok; #2 is the important one -- #1 just seemed like a good compliment to what was already there that we figured we'd do at the same time. But we didn't know if there were other valid use cases that #1 would violate, which is why we RFC'ed/asked. > PS: The second patch (ref count == 1 in OBJ_DESTRUCT) is trivial but > reasonable. Yeah -- unfortunately, while the patch to add that assert() is trivial, it's finding lots of ref counting bugs in the MPI layer, so I don't want to commit it yet. :-) I'll come back with more info after I've sorted through them... -- Jeff Squyres jsquy...@cisco.com For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/
