Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

unitarize_link_test has a memory leak #94

Closed
maddyscientist opened this issue Dec 13, 2012 · 3 comments
Closed

unitarize_link_test has a memory leak #94

maddyscientist opened this issue Dec 13, 2012 · 3 comments
Assignees
Milestone

Comments

@maddyscientist
Copy link
Member

unitarize_link_test has a memory leak, as indicated below. Justin, can you see if you can find this?

WARNING: The following internal memory allocations were not freed.

Device 0x700b00000 2654208 cudaGaugeField(), cuda_gauge_field.cpp:17
Device 0x700da0000 2654208 cudaGaugeField(), cuda_gauge_field.cpp:17
Device 0x701040000 811008 cudaGaugeField(), cuda_gauge_field.cpp:17
Device 0x701140000 811008 cudaGaugeField(), cuda_gauge_field.cpp:17
Host 0x6070550 32 cpuGaugeField(), cpu_gauge_field.cpp:27
Host 0x7688af0 48 cpuGaugeField(), cpu_gauge_field.cpp:62
Host 0xa0a8ef0 48 cpuGaugeField(), cpu_gauge_field.cpp:62
Host 0xa5fb400 73728 cpuGaugeField(), cpu_gauge_field.cpp:65
Host 0xa60d410 73728 cpuGaugeField(), cpu_gauge_field.cpp:65
Host 0xa61f420 73728 cpuGaugeField(), cpu_gauge_field.cpp:65
Host 0xa631430 73728 cpuGaugeField(), cpu_gauge_field.cpp:65
Host 0xa643440 73728 cpuGaugeField(), cpu_gauge_field.cpp:65
Host 0xa655450 73728 cpuGaugeField(), cpu_gauge_field.cpp:65
Host 0xa667460 73728 cpuGaugeField(), cpu_gauge_field.cpp:65
Host 0xa679470 73728 cpuGaugeField(), cpu_gauge_field.cpp:65

@ghost ghost assigned jpfoley Dec 13, 2012
@maddyscientist
Copy link
Member Author

Punting this to 0.5.1, since it is a relatively harmless leak as a result of using static pointers. This will be fixed naturally as Guochun's code is objectified.

@jpfoley
Copy link
Member

jpfoley commented Dec 21, 2012

I dragged my heels on this. It would be straightforward to fix, but not
high on my list of priorities.
Once the domain decomposition is done, I'll look at it.

On 12/21/2012 02:06 PM, mikeaclark wrote:

Punting this to 0.5.1, since it is a relatively harmless leak as a
result of using static pointers. This will be fixed naturally as
Guochun's code is objectified.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#94 (comment).

@maddyscientist
Copy link
Member Author

Closed with commit 39c7618.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants