On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 08:26:44AM -0600, Nathan Hjelm wrote:
> A number of issues have been raised as part of this discussion. Here is
> what I have seen so far:
> - contructor/destructor order not garaunteed: From an opal perspective
> this should not be a problem. Most components are unloaded by
> opal_finalize () not opal_finalize_util (). So opal components
> opal should already be finalized by the time the destructor is called
> (or we can finalize them in the destructor if necessary).
> - portability: All the compilers most of us care about: gcc, intel,
> clang. The exceptions appear to be xlc and pgi. For these compilers
> we can fall back on Ralph's solution and just leak if
> MPI_Finalize () is not called after MPI_T_Finalize (). Attached is an
> implementation that does that (needs some adjustment).
Correction. xlc does support the destructor function attribute. The odd
one out is PGI.
- application/pgp-signature attachment: stored