Ok, fair enough -- I can remove it.
But the question still remains: should we increase the size of the padding for the predefined datatypes? The idea is that it would need to be big enough for the entire 1.9/1.10 (2.0?) series.
On Jan 13, 2014, at 4:16 PM, George Bosilca <bosilca_at_[hidden]>
> The code is well protected against such issues. If one of our base structures become larger than corresponding predefined structure, the compiler should trigger an error similar to:
> In file included from ../../../ompi/ompi/datatype/ompi_datatype_create_contiguous.c:23:0:
> ../../../ompi/ompi/datatype/ompi_datatype.h:105:10: error: size of array 'padding' is too large
> char padding[PREDEFINED_DATATYPE_PAD - sizeof(ompi_datatype_t)];
> This is the case for all types that have a predefined enveloppe. Thus, the commit 30268 was unnecessary as the check was already included in the compilation by the inclusion of the ompi_debugger_canary.c.
> On Jan 13, 2014, at 17:10 , Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) <jsquyres_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> I noticed the following this morning:
>> * sizeof(ompi_predefined_datatype_t): 512
>> * sizeof(ompi_datatype_t): 488
>> * padding left: 24
>> Do we need to increase the size of padding for predefined communicators for v1.9?
>> Jeff Squyres
>> For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/
>> devel mailing list
> devel mailing list
For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/