dolfin team mailing list archive

[Anders Logg <logg@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 08:27:30AM +0100, Garth N. Wells wrote:
> 
> 
> Dag Lindbo wrote:
> > Hello!
> > 
> > I attach a script that runs Valgrind (memcheck) on all C++ demos (based
> > on the one that just runs all demos). My suggestion is that this be
> > included in the testing procedure.
> > 
> > At present (on my machine) 17 of 31 demos result in a memory leak (!)
> > None of the demos produce a memory error.
> > 
> > Note that most, but not all, leaks are due to XML parsing. Are these
> > really leaks? It is impossible for vg to understand memory pools and
> > other exotic memory management that are not explicitly freed. Glib does
> > this in the GTS interface. Maybe libxml2 does something similar. In that
> > case, I can easily provide a suppression for xml2.
> >
> 
> I took a look and fixed at least one leak, but a few others don't look 
> like leaks to me. Part of the problem is that I think we're using 
> pointers is some classes where std::vector would be more appropriate, 
> particularly in the mesh and dof map classes, which is a source of 
> potential leaks and makes ownership unclear.
> 
> Is there a reason that we use pointers for various arrays in the mesh 
> classes rather than std::vector?

Yes, the mesh implementation relies heavily on storing data in
contiguous arrays and working with offsets into those arrays.

I doubt that there are any serious memory leaks in the mesh classes.
All data is stored in MeshTopology and MeshGeometry and their
destructors should take care of cleaning up.

-- 
Anders

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature