On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 03:28:59PM +, Dave Goodell (dgoodell) wrote:
> On May 13, 2014, at 4:01 PM, Nathan Hjelm wrote:
>
> > While tracking down memory leaks in components I ran into an interesting
> > issue. osc/rdma uses an opal_free_list_t (not an ompi_free_list_t) for
> > buffer fragment
On May 13, 2014, at 4:01 PM, Nathan Hjelm wrote:
> While tracking down memory leaks in components I ran into an interesting
> issue. osc/rdma uses an opal_free_list_t (not an ompi_free_list_t) for
> buffer fragments. The fragment class allocates a buffer as part in the
> constructor and frees the
Indeed, if the constructor is called then the destructor should be as
well. Adding the destructor call might be a good idea, despite the
fact that it delays everything till the end of the execution. The
benefits during the execution is minimal, it only keeps valgrind happy
at the end.
Btw, can we
While tracking down memory leaks in components I ran into an interesting
issue. osc/rdma uses an opal_free_list_t (not an ompi_free_list_t) for
buffer fragments. The fragment class allocates a buffer as part in the
constructor and frees the buffer in the destructor. The problem is that
the item con
