sorry if I sounded too harsh, there was a real memory leak that you
fixed, I agree to that. I committed the correct version.
Thanks
Edgar
On 5/28/2015 9:00 AM, Gilles Gouaillardet wrote:
Edgar,
i am sorry about that.
i fixed some memory leaks (some memory was leaking in some error cases).
i
Edgar,
i am sorry about that.
i fixed some memory leaks (some memory was leaking in some error cases).
i also moved (up) some malloc in order to group them and simplify the
handling
of error cases.
per your comment, one move was incorrect indeed :-(
Cheers,
Gilles
On 5/28/2015 12:14 PM, Ed
looking at the old code, I understand what you tried to fix, I'll commit
a proper version in a couple of min.
Thanks
Edgar
On 5/28/2015 8:44 AM, Edgar Gabriel wrote:
ok, I see you moved the malloc up, the malloc was originally just for
the receiving side of the communication, you moved it up t
ok, I see you moved the malloc up, the malloc was originally just for
the receiving side of the communication, you moved it up to cover both.
That is however unfortunately not correct.
I will fix it in a couple of mins.
Thanks
Edgar
On 5/28/2015 8:25 AM, Edgar Gabriel wrote:
Gilles,
I saw yo
Gilles,
I saw you a fixed a couple of the coverty warnings in ompio, but
unfortunately it also broke some things.
--
Question to you: in io_ompio.c line 2345, you introduced a malloc for
f_procs_in_group that was not there before. That array is allocated a
couple of lines earlier in the subr
