Thanks for the hints. I have modified my branch. I was missing the MatShellSetVecType() call. Now everything works fine and all tests are clean.
Jose > El 9 may 2020, a las 21:32, Stefano Zampini <stefano.zamp...@gmail.com> > escribió: > > Jose > > I have just pushed an updated example with the MatMat operation, and I do not > see the memory leak. Can you check? > > zampins@jasmine:~/petsc$ make -f gmakefile.test test search='mat%' > searchin='ex69' PETSC_OPTIONS='-malloc -malloc_dump -malloc_debug' > /usr/bin/python /home/zampins/petsc/config/gmakegentest.py > --petsc-dir=/home/zampins/petsc --petsc-arch=arch-gpu-double-openmp-openblas > --testdir=./arch-gpu-double-openmp-openblas/tests > Using MAKEFLAGS: -- PETSC_OPTIONS=-malloc -malloc_dump -malloc_debug > searchin=ex69 search=mat% > CC arch-gpu-double-openmp-openblas/tests/mat/tests/ex69.o > CLINKER arch-gpu-double-openmp-openblas/tests/mat/tests/ex69 > TEST > arch-gpu-double-openmp-openblas/tests/counts/mat_tests-ex69_1.counts > ok mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-1test-0_l-0_use_shell-0 > ok diff-mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-1test-0_l-0_use_shell-0 > ok mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-1test-0_l-0_use_shell-1 > ok diff-mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-1test-0_l-0_use_shell-1 > ok mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-1test-0_l-5_use_shell-0 > ok diff-mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-1test-0_l-5_use_shell-0 > ok mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-1test-0_l-5_use_shell-1 > ok diff-mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-1test-0_l-5_use_shell-1 > ok mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-1test-1_l-0_use_shell-0 > ok diff-mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-1test-1_l-0_use_shell-0 > ok mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-1test-1_l-0_use_shell-1 > ok diff-mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-1test-1_l-0_use_shell-1 > ok mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-1test-1_l-5_use_shell-0 > ok diff-mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-1test-1_l-5_use_shell-0 > ok mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-1test-1_l-5_use_shell-1 > ok diff-mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-1test-1_l-5_use_shell-1 > ok mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-1test-2_l-0_use_shell-0 > ok diff-mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-1test-2_l-0_use_shell-0 > ok mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-1test-2_l-0_use_shell-1 > ok diff-mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-1test-2_l-0_use_shell-1 > ok mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-1test-2_l-5_use_shell-0 > ok diff-mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-1test-2_l-5_use_shell-0 > ok mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-1test-2_l-5_use_shell-1 > ok diff-mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-1test-2_l-5_use_shell-1 > ok mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-2test-0_l-0_use_shell-0 > ok diff-mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-2test-0_l-0_use_shell-0 > ok mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-2test-0_l-0_use_shell-1 > ok diff-mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-2test-0_l-0_use_shell-1 > ok mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-2test-0_l-5_use_shell-0 > ok diff-mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-2test-0_l-5_use_shell-0 > ok mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-2test-0_l-5_use_shell-1 > ok diff-mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-2test-0_l-5_use_shell-1 > ok mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-2test-1_l-0_use_shell-0 > ok diff-mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-2test-1_l-0_use_shell-0 > ok mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-2test-1_l-0_use_shell-1 > ok diff-mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-2test-1_l-0_use_shell-1 > ok mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-2test-1_l-5_use_shell-0 > ok diff-mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-2test-1_l-5_use_shell-0 > ok mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-2test-1_l-5_use_shell-1 > ok diff-mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-2test-1_l-5_use_shell-1 > ok mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-2test-2_l-0_use_shell-0 > ok diff-mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-2test-2_l-0_use_shell-0 > ok mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-2test-2_l-0_use_shell-1 > ok diff-mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-2test-2_l-0_use_shell-1 > ok mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-2test-2_l-5_use_shell-0 > ok diff-mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-2test-2_l-5_use_shell-0 > ok mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-2test-2_l-5_use_shell-1 > ok diff-mat_tests-ex69_1+nsize-2test-2_l-5_use_shell-1 > > # ------------- > # Summary > # ------------- > # success 48/48 tests (100.0%) > # failed 0/48 tests (0.0%) > # todo 0/48 tests (0.0%) > # skip 0/48 tests (0.0%) > # > # Wall clock time for tests: 58 sec > # Approximate CPU time (not incl. build time): 62.11 sec > # > # Timing summary (actual test time / total CPU time): > # mat_tests-ex69_1: 2.30 sec / 62.11 sec > >> On May 9, 2020, at 9:28 PM, Jose E. Roman <jro...@dsic.upv.es> wrote: >> >> >> >>> El 9 may 2020, a las 20:00, Stefano Zampini <stefano.zamp...@gmail.com> >>> escribió: >>> >>> >>> >>> Il giorno sab 9 mag 2020 alle ore 19:43 Jose E. Roman <jro...@dsic.upv.es> >>> ha scritto: >>> >>> >>>> El 9 may 2020, a las 12:45, Stefano Zampini <stefano.zamp...@gmail.com> >>>> escribió: >>>> >>>> Jose >>>> >>>> I have just pushed a test >>>> https://gitlab.com/petsc/petsc/-/blob/d64c2bc63c8d5d1a8c689f1abc762ae2722bba26/src/mat/tests/ex69.c >>>> See if it fits your framework, and feel free to modify the test to add >>>> more checks >>> >>> Almost good. The following modification of the example fails with -test 1: >>> >>> >>> diff --git a/src/mat/tests/ex69.c b/src/mat/tests/ex69.c >>> index e562f1e2e3..2df2c89be1 100644 >>> --- a/src/mat/tests/ex69.c >>> +++ b/src/mat/tests/ex69.c >>> @@ -84,6 +84,10 @@ int main(int argc,char **argv) >>> } >>> ierr = VecCUDARestoreArray(v,&vv);CHKERRQ(ierr); >>> >>> + if (test==1) { >>> + ierr = MatDenseCUDAGetArray(B,&aa);CHKERRQ(ierr); >>> + if (aa) SETERRQ(PETSC_COMM_WORLD,PETSC_ERR_USER,"Expected a null >>> pointer"); >>> + } >>> >>> /* free work space */ >>> ierr = MatDestroy(&B);CHKERRQ(ierr); >>> >>> >>> >>> I would expect that after MatDenseCUDAResetArray() the pointer is NULL >>> because it was set so in line 60. In the CPU counterpart it works as >>> expected. >>> >>> Pushed a fix for this, thanks. >>> >>> Another comment is: in line 60 you have changed MatDenseCUDAPlaceArray() to >>> MatDenseCUDAReplaceArray(). This is ok, but it is strange because >>> MatDenseReplaceArray() does not exist. So the interface is different in GPU >>> vs CPU, but I guess it is necessary here. >>> >>> I think we do not support calling PlaceArray twice anywhere PETSc. This is >>> why I have added MatDenseCUDAReplaceArray(). If you need support for the >>> CPU case too, I can add it. >> >> Yes, please. It is better to have the same thing in both cases. >> >> I am attaching the modified example, now performs a mat-mat product. If I do >> A*B it works well, but if I replace A with a shell matrix I get a memory >> leak. >> >> [ 0]32 bytes VecCUDAAllocateCheck() line 34 in >> /home/users/proy/copa/jroman/soft/petsc/src/vec/vec/impls/seq/seqcuda/veccuda2.cu >> [ 0]32 bytes VecCUDAAllocateCheck() line 34 in >> /home/users/proy/copa/jroman/soft/petsc/src/vec/vec/impls/seq/seqcuda/veccuda2.cu >> >> >> >>> >>> Thanks. >>> Jose >>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Il giorno ven 8 mag 2020 alle ore 18:48 Jose E. Roman <jro...@dsic.upv.es> >>>> ha scritto: >>>> Attached. Run with -test 1 or -test 2 >>>> >>>>> El 8 may 2020, a las 17:14, Stefano Zampini <stefano.zamp...@gmail.com> >>>>> escribió: >>>>> >>>>> Jose >>>>> >>>>> Just send me a MWE and I’ll fix the case for you >>>>> >>>>> Thanks >>>>> Stefano >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Stefano >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Stefano >> <ex69.c> >