On 9 July 2010 22:07, Barry Smith <bsmith at mcs.anl.gov> wrote: > > ?Hmm, looks like we could use a Malloc3() there :-) Even better. >
Is this safe regarding memory alignment? > > ? Barry > > On Jul 9, 2010, at 8:00 PM, Lisandro Dalcin wrote: > >> On 9 July 2010 21:26, Barry Smith <bsmith at mcs.anl.gov> wrote: >>> >>> ?I consider this bogus warnings. >>> >> >> I agree on that. My point is the actual usage of Malloc2. >> >> ?ierr ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?= >> PetscMalloc2(1,VecScatter_MPI_ToAll,&sto,size,PetscMPIInt,&sto->count);CHKERRQ(ierr); >> ?ierr ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?= >> PetscMalloc(size*sizeof(PetscMPIInt),&sto->displx);CHKERRQ(ierr); >> >> What's the point of allocating 1 struct + size ints, and next size >> more ints? I would use Malloc for the struct, and then Malloc2 for the >> two arrays. >> >> >>> ? Barry >>> >>> On Jul 9, 2010, at 7:22 PM, Lisandro Dalcin wrote: >>> >>>> While building with nvcc, I looked at this warning: >>>> >>>> libfast in: /usr/local/petsc/dev/src/vec/vec/utils >>>> vscat.c(322): warning: variable "sto" is used before its value is set >>>> >>>> Do we really need to use Malloc2 in such line? Perhaps we should >>>> actually use Malloc2 for sto->count and sto->displx ? >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Lisandro Dalcin >>>> --------------- >>>> CIMEC (INTEC/CONICET-UNL) >>>> Predio CONICET-Santa Fe >>>> Colectora RN 168 Km 472, Paraje El Pozo >>>> Tel: +54-342-4511594 (ext 1011) >>>> Tel/Fax: +54-342-4511169 >>> >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Lisandro Dalcin >> --------------- >> CIMEC (INTEC/CONICET-UNL) >> Predio CONICET-Santa Fe >> Colectora RN 168 Km 472, Paraje El Pozo >> Tel: +54-342-4511594 (ext 1011) >> Tel/Fax: +54-342-4511169 > > -- Lisandro Dalcin --------------- CIMEC (INTEC/CONICET-UNL) Predio CONICET-Santa Fe Colectora RN 168 Km 472, Paraje El Pozo Tel: +54-342-4511594 (ext 1011) Tel/Fax: +54-342-4511169
