Re: [OMPI devel] RFC: Add an __attribute__((destructor)) function to opal

2014-07-18 Thread Ralph Castain
I don't recommend our solution as a general approach - we moved the object instance to the framework base so it never goes out of memory. Regardless, it seems to me that proper cleanup is the better solution, although it means work. I've asked that it be added to next week's telecon agenda so we

Re: [OMPI devel] PkgSrc build of 1.8.1 gives a portability error

2014-07-18 Thread Ralph Castain
Hmmmick, we use the old -a and -o in a number of places. I'll start slowly cleaning them up. Thanks Bert! On Jul 16, 2014, at 11:28 PM, Bert Wesarg wrote: > On 07/17/2014 06:32 AM, Kevin Buckley wrote: >> => Checking for portability problems in extracted files >> ERROR: [check-portability.

Re: [OMPI devel] RFC: Add an __attribute__((destructor)) function to opal

2014-07-18 Thread Ralph Castain
On Jul 18, 2014, at 10:24 AM, George Bosilca wrote: > 1. If I remember correctly, this topic has already been raised in the Forum. > And the decision was to maintain the current behavior (tools and MPI > init/fini are independent/disconnected). > > 2. Having to manually set a global flag in o

Re: [OMPI devel] RFC: Add an __attribute__((destructor)) function to opal

2014-07-18 Thread George Bosilca
1. If I remember correctly, this topic has already been raised in the Forum. And the decision was to maintain the current behavior (tools and MPI init/fini are independent/disconnected). 2. Having to manually set a global flag in order to correctly finalize a library is HORRIBLE by any reasonable

Re: [OMPI devel] RFC: Add an __attribute__((destructor)) function to opal

2014-07-18 Thread Gilles Gouaillardet
> > It would make sense, though I guess I always thought that was part of what > happened in OBJ_CLASS_INSTANCE - guess I was wrong. My thinking was that > DEREGISTER would be the counter to INSTANCE, and I do want to keep this > from getting even more clunky - so maybe renaming INSTANCE to be REGI

Re: [OMPI devel] RFC: Add an __attribute__((destructor)) function to opal

2014-07-18 Thread Ralph Castain
On Jul 18, 2014, at 8:25 AM, Gilles Gouaillardet wrote: > +1 for the overall idea ! > > On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 10:17 PM, Ralph Castain wrote: >> * add an OBJ_CLASS_DEREGISTER and require that all instantiations be matched >> by deregister at close of the framework/component that instanced i

Re: [OMPI devel] RFC: Add an __attribute__((destructor)) function to opal

2014-07-18 Thread Gilles Gouaillardet
+1 for the overall idea ! On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 10:17 PM, Ralph Castain wrote: > > * add an OBJ_CLASS_DEREGISTER and require that all instantiations be > matched by deregister at close of the framework/component that instanced > it. Of course, that requires that we protect the class system agai

Re: [OMPI devel] RFC: Add an __attribute__((destructor)) function to opal

2014-07-18 Thread Ralph Castain
I'm going to resurface this suggestion. Is there some reason why this wouldn't be the way to resolve the problem? > * add an OBJ_CLASS_DEREGISTER and require that all instantiations be matched > by deregister at close of the framework/component that instanced it. Of > course, that requires that