> I don’t see the err_data getting freed in ofi_cq_readerr(). Also, just adding > a free > may not be sufficient, shouldn’t it have something like the saved_err_data > mechanism > that is in util_eq.c to keep the err_data in scope for compatibility reasons?
I agree that the EQ and CQ implementations should be closer aligned. The util_cq code allocates and frees the err_entry, but not the err_data. I don't see that any providers actually use this field for CQ entries, so it likely isn't an issue in practice. It seems cleaner that if util_cq frees err_data, it should also allocate it. But... util_eq frees err_data without allocating it... To 'fix' the CQ, I would add a new call, ofi_cq_write_error_data() that can take the err_data and size as input parameters. That would allow util_cq to include the allocation as part of the event data. - Sean _______________________________________________ ofiwg mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openfabrics.org/mailman/listinfo/ofiwg
