On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 9:00 AM, Dominik Szczerba <dominik at itis.ethz.ch>wrote:
> I am getting the following reports running with --leak-check=full > (which could be mentioned somewhere in FAQ). Is this something to > worry about? > The first one is just OS stuff. The second could be a leak, but its only 8 bytes, and seems independent of the problem size. I will check it out. Matt > Thanks > Dominik > > > ==10052== 300 (60 direct, 240 indirect) bytes in 1 blocks are > definitely lost in loss record 14 of 15 > ==10052== at 0x4C28F9F: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:236) > ==10052== by 0x67AB855: nss_parse_service_list (nsswitch.c:626) > ==10052== by 0x67ABE39: __nss_database_lookup (nsswitch.c:167) > ==10052== by 0x74B6823: ??? > ==10052== by 0x67648AC: getpwuid_r@@GLIBC_2.2.5 (getXXbyYY_r.c:256) > ==10052== by 0x67641A2: getpwuid (getXXbyYY.c:117) > ==10052== by 0x99BE9D: PetscGetUserName (fuser.c:66) > ==10052== by 0x5D2A20: PetscErrorPrintfInitialize (errtrace.c:68) > ==10052== by 0x5F1057: PetscInitialize (pinit.c:697) > > ==10051== 8 bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 2 of 15 > ==10051== at 0x4C28F9F: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:236) > ==10051== by 0x1296EB9: GKmalloc__ (util.c:151) > ==10051== by 0x1296E00: fmalloc__ (util.c:112) > ==10051== by 0x1295CBC: CheckInputs__ (weird.c:188) > ==10051== by 0x126F8B8: ParMETIS_V3_PartKway (kmetis.c:56) > ==10051== by 0xD26874: MatPartitioningApply_Parmetis (pmetis.c:96) > ==10051== by 0x6DDCFC: MatPartitioningApply (partition.c:226) > -- What most experimenters take for granted before they begin their experiments is infinitely more interesting than any results to which their experiments lead. -- Norbert Wiener -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20111226/75a4bc13/attachment.htm>
