[petsc-users] Error with VecDestroy_MPIFFTW+0x61

[Smith, Barry F.]

  Sajid,

    Where is the pull request for this? Better to get in the Bibuckit pull request system then have it drag out and have code change around. So please go ahead and post the pull request. It looked pretty much done the last time I saw it.

    Barry


> On Apr 17, 2019, at 9:32 AM, Matthew Knepley <knepley at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 10:25 AM Sajid Ali <sajidsyed2021 at u.northwestern.edu> wrote:
> Hi Matt/Barry, 
> 
> I've implemented this for 1D-complex-mpi vec and tested it. 
> 
> Here is the modified source file -> https://bitbucket.org/sajid__ali/petsc/src/86fb19b57a7c4f8f42644e5160d2afbdc5e03639/src/mat/impls/fft/fftw/fftw.c
> 
> Functions definitions at https://bitbucket.org/sajid__ali/petsc/src/86fb19b57a7c4f8f42644e5160d2afbdc5e03639/src/mat/impls/fft/fftw/fftw.c#lines-395
> 
> New op at https://bitbucket.org/sajid__ali/petsc/src/86fb19b57a7c4f8f42644e5160d2afbdc5e03639/src/mat/impls/fft/fftw/fftw.c#lines-514
> 
> If this looks good, I can extend it to all cases (1/2/3 dims + real/complex) and add a vecdupliate/vecdestroy pair in the tests. 
> 
> This is very good. Some suggestions:
> 
> 1) Send the branch pointer. Its easier for us to look at.
> 
> 2) Name the branch <username>/fix_<description>
> 
> 3) Don't like the source files modified in the comment. The ChangeSet tells us that.
> 
> and maybe
> 
> 4) Squash out some of the sets that are just fixing bugs. However, this is advanced, so not this time.
> 
>   Thanks,
> 
>      Matt
>  
> Thank You, 
> Sajid Ali
> Applied Physics
> Northwestern University
> 
> 
> -- 
> What most experimenters take for granted before they begin their experiments is infinitely more interesting than any results to which their experiments lead.
> -- Norbert Wiener
> 
> https://www.cse.buffalo.edu/~knepley/