dolfin team mailing list archive

[Anders Logg <logg@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 05:56:02PM +0200, Anders Logg wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 04:48:26PM +0100, Garth N. Wells wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > Garth N. Wells wrote:
> > > 
> > > bugzilla-daemon@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > >> http://www.fenics.org/cgi-bin/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40
> > >>
> > >>            Summary: Memory leaked after (sub) DofMap extraction
> > >>            Product: DOLFIN
> > >>            Version: development version
> > >>           Platform: PC
> > >>         OS/Version: Linux
> > >>             Status: NEW
> > >>           Severity: blocker
> > >>           Priority: P2
> > >>          Component: general
> > >>         AssignedTo: dolfin-dev@xxxxxxxxxx
> > >>         ReportedBy: dag@xxxxxxxxxx
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> This leak is seen eg. in the Stokes demo using Valgrind. It originates from
> > >> where sub functions are extracted and appears to be a sub_dof_map not freed on
> > >> line 132 of DofMap.cpp. This is in an area of Dolfin where I'm not familiar
> > >> enough to suggest a fix.
> > >>
> > > 
> > > The problem is that both DofMap and BoundaryCondition::LocalData call
> > > 
> > >    DofMap* DofMap::extractDofMap(...)
> > > 
> > > but don't assume responsibility for the data and clean up in the destructor.
> > > 
> > > I'm looking at a solution, but I'm running into some problems that I 
> > > don't yet understand.
> > > 
> > > Garth
> > > 
> > 
> > I've fixed the memory leaks, but it was hard to follow the code in 
> > DofMap, and the fix in DofMap.cpp is not entirely satisfying. Some 
> > functions return pointers to data that they create but then it's often 
> > not clear who owns the data. Perhaps DofMap should own all sub-DofMaps 
> > of it and be responsible for cleaning them all up? If a sub-DofMap is 
> > needed, DofMap can be asked for a reference to it. This would also 
> > simplify any re-ordering of the DofMap.

Did you close the bug in Bugzilla?

-- 
Anders

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature