Yes I understand what you are doing but there is still a possible error
case I was trying to consider and your initial placement of the call
outside of the af==AF_INET check lead me to assume you were using
something other than IPv4 which is why I was asking if you had an
example. You don't a
Hello Don!
Am Donnerstag, 7. Januar 2010 23:22:27 schrieben Sie:
> I am assuming you are using something other than IPv4 so I am curious
> what the string looks like when you call
> "
> inet_ntop(AF_INET, (void *) &btl_addr->sin_addr,
> btl_addr_string, INET_ADDRSTRLEN);
> "
>
Hi Dennis,
I will look at this today. And apply the change as appropriate.
-DON
On 01/07/10 06:41, Dennis Schridde wrote:
Hello!
In btl_udapl_proc.c, if peer_proc->proc_addr_count <= 0, btl_addr_string will
not be initialised. Attached is a patch that initialised btl_addr_string at
the firs
Hello!
In btl_udapl_proc.c, if peer_proc->proc_addr_count <= 0, btl_addr_string will
not be initialised. Attached is a patch that initialised btl_addr_string at
the first possible moment, which fixes this problem.
Regards,
Dennis Schridde
--- openmpi-1.4/ompi/mca/btl/udapl/btl_udapl_proc.c.orig
