Thanks! I'll discuss it with the team and decide how best to handle this for the 1.8 series. For 1.9, we plan to update to a newer hwloc version anyway.
On Apr 5, 2014, at 12:52 PM, Brice Goglin <brice.gog...@inria.fr> wrote: > Hello Ralph, > > I took care of the defects under opal/mca/hwloc/hwloc172. Nothing > important there (a memory leak in some deprecated code that is likely > unused today). But I also updated hwloc's v1.7 branch with all recent > fixes from more recent branches. You may want to update OMPI's copy. > At least you should take 125fb316 and 7ebe7026 but my feeling is that > you should just update hwloc the latest v1.7 snapshot to make > maintenance easier (otherwise it's hard to remember that only 3 commits > were applied, especially when Jeff applies some of them to OMPI before > hwloc). > > Brice > > > Le 05/04/2014 18:56, Ralph Castain a écrit : >> Hi folks >> >> I ran the 1.8 release thru Coverity - please review the results: >> >> https://scan5.coverity.com:8443/reports.htm#v32524/p10084 >> >> Ralph >> >> _______________________________________________ >> devel mailing list >> de...@open-mpi.org >> Subscription: http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel >> Link to this post: >> http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/devel/2014/04/14460.php > > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list > de...@open-mpi.org > Subscription: http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel > Link to this post: > http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/devel/2014/04/14461.php
