[petsc-dev] threadcomm memory leak

[Barry Smith]

On Jul 16, 2012, at 6:47 PM, Jed Brown wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 5:44 PM, Barry Smith <bsmith at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
>   I totally agree it is a hack and should never be used, BUT as far as I was aware in no place in PETSc did we do that? If that is it should be fixed. But the fix is likely not forcing mpiuni to have two communicators it is just to do things right.
> 
> Do you not consider http://petsc.cs.iit.edu/petsc/petsc-dev/rev/169c19e9ea54 to be a hack?

  Jed,

   Yes, that is absolutely a hack and does not belong there. But you are totally miss understanding what I am saying: that hack is NEW. For 15 years PETSc did NOT need a hack to work with MPIUNI (which has a single communicator), thus I conclude that MPUNI is fine and something is wrong with the PETSc thread comm stuff if it requires that hack. That is, why the heck does petscthreadcomm depend on MPI_COMM_SELF != MPI_COMM_WORLD while for 20 years NOTHING ELSE IN PETSc (which is a dang lot more complicated than petscthreadcomm) does not depend on MPI_COMM_SELF != MPI_COMM_WORLD???

   In other words fix petscthreadcomm model; don't mess with a perfectly good mpiuni.

    Barry