> [0.000000] [mc_explo/INFO] 3: iSend(mbox=0)
> [0.000000] [mc_explo/INFO] 1: WaitComm(from 3 to 1, mbox=0, no timeout)
> [0.000000] [mc_explo/INFO] You can debug the problem (and see the whole details) by rerunning out of simgrid-mc with --cfg=model-check/replay:'1;3;1;1;3;3;1'
-> [0.000000] [mc_dfs/INFO] DFS exploration ended. 263 unique states visited; 37 backtracks (559 transition replays, 259 states visited overall)
+> [0.000000] [mc_dfs/INFO] DFS exploration ended. 348 unique states visited; 67 backtracks (1051 transition replays, 633 states visited overall)
\ No newline at end of file
> [HostA:server:(1) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] OK
> [HostB:client:(2) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
> [HostC:client:(3) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
+> [HostA:server:(1) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] OK
+> [HostB:client:(2) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
+> [HostC:client:(3) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
> [HostC:client:(3) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
> [HostA:server:(1) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] OK
> [HostB:client:(2) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
> [HostC:client:(3) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
> [HostA:server:(1) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] OK
> [HostB:client:(2) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
+> [HostC:client:(3) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
> [HostA:server:(1) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] OK
> [HostB:client:(2) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
> [HostC:client:(3) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
-> [HostC:client:(3) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
> [HostA:server:(1) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] OK
> [HostB:client:(2) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
> [HostB:client:(2) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
> [HostA:server:(1) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] OK
> [HostC:client:(3) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
-> [HostA:server:(1) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] OK
-> [HostB:client:(2) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
-> [HostC:client:(3) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
> [HostB:client:(2) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
> [HostA:server:(1) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] OK
> [HostC:client:(3) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
> [HostB:client:(2) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
> [HostA:server:(1) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] OK
> [HostC:client:(3) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
-> [HostC:client:(3) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
> [HostA:server:(1) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] OK
> [HostB:client:(2) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
> [HostC:client:(3) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
-> [HostA:server:(1) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] OK
-> [HostB:client:(2) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
> [HostB:client:(2) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
> [HostA:server:(1) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] OK
> [HostC:client:(3) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
+> [HostC:client:(3) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
+> [HostA:server:(1) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] OK
+> [HostB:client:(2) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
> [HostA:server:(1) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] OK
> [HostB:client:(2) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
> [HostC:client:(3) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
> [HostA:server:(1) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] OK
> [HostB:client:(2) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
> [HostC:client:(3) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
+> [HostB:client:(2) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
+> [HostA:server:(1) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] OK
+> [HostC:client:(3) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
> [HostC:client:(3) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
> [HostA:server:(1) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] OK
> [HostB:client:(2) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
-> [HostA:server:(1) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] OK
> [HostB:client:(2) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
+> [HostA:server:(1) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] OK
> [HostC:client:(3) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
-> [HostB:client:(2) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
> [HostA:server:(1) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] OK
+> [HostB:client:(2) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
> [HostC:client:(3) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
> [HostB:client:(2) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
> [HostA:server:(1) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] OK
> [HostC:client:(3) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
> [HostA:server:(1) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] OK
> [HostB:client:(2) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
-> [HostB:client:(2) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
-> [HostA:server:(1) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] OK
-> [HostC:client:(3) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
> [HostC:client:(3) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
> [HostA:server:(1) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] OK
> [HostB:client:(2) 0.000000] [electric_fence/INFO] Sent!
-> [0.000000] [mc_dfs/INFO] DFS exploration ended. 169 unique states visited; 29 backtracks (261 transition replays, 64 states visited overall)
\ No newline at end of file
+> [0.000000] [mc_dfs/INFO] DFS exploration ended. 169 unique states visited; 28 backtracks (283 transition replays, 64 states visited overall)
\ No newline at end of file
> [0.000000] [mc_explo/INFO] *** PROPERTY NOT VALID ***
> [0.000000] [mc_explo/INFO] **************************
> [0.000000] [mc_explo/INFO] Counter-example execution trace:
-> [0.000000] [mc_explo/INFO] 3: iSend(mbox=0)
> [0.000000] [mc_explo/INFO] 1: iRecv(mbox=0)
+> [0.000000] [mc_explo/INFO] 3: iSend(mbox=0)
> [0.000000] [mc_explo/INFO] 1: WaitComm(from 3 to 1, mbox=0, no timeout)
> [0.000000] [mc_explo/INFO] 1: iRecv(mbox=0)
> [0.000000] [mc_explo/INFO] 2: iSend(mbox=0)
> [0.000000] [mc_explo/INFO] 1: WaitComm(from 2 to 1, mbox=0, no timeout)
-> [0.000000] [mc_explo/INFO] You can debug the problem (and see the whole details) by rerunning out of simgrid-mc with --cfg=model-check/replay:'3;1;1;1;2;1'
-> [0.000000] [mc_dfs/INFO] DFS exploration ended. 22 unique states visited; 2 backtracks (24 transition replays, 0 states visited overall)
+> [0.000000] [mc_explo/INFO] You can debug the problem (and see the whole details) by rerunning out of simgrid-mc with --cfg=model-check/replay:'1;3;1;1;2;1'
+> [0.000000] [mc_dfs/INFO] DFS exploration ended. 21 unique states visited; 2 backtracks (24 transition replays, 1 states visited overall)
> [Checker] There remains 0 actors, but none to interleave (depth 4).
> [Checker] Execution came to an end at 1;1;0 (state: 3, depth: 3)
> [Checker] Backtracking from 1;1;0
-> [Checker] DFS exploration ended. 3 unique states visited; 1 backtracks (3 transition replays, 0 states visited overall)
+> [Checker] DFS exploration ended. 3 unique states visited; 0 backtracks (3 transition replays, 0 states visited overall)
$ ${bindir:=.}/../../../bin/simgrid-mc --log=mc_dfs.thres:verbose --log=root.fmt="[Checker]%e%m%n" -- ${bindir:=.}/s4u-synchro-barrier 2 --log=s4u_test.thres:critical --log=root.fmt="[App%e%e%e%e]%e%m%n"
> [Checker] Start a DFS exploration. Reduction is: dpor.
> [Checker] There remains 0 actors, but none to interleave (depth 6).
> [Checker] Execution came to an end at 2;1;1;2;0 (state: 9, depth: 5)
> [Checker] Backtracking from 2;1;1;2;0
-> [Checker] DFS exploration ended. 9 unique states visited; 2 backtracks (10 transition replays, 0 states visited overall)
+> [Checker] DFS exploration ended. 9 unique states visited; 1 backtracks (10 transition replays, 0 states visited overall)
$ ${bindir:=.}/../../../bin/simgrid-mc --log=mc_dfs.thres:verbose --log=root.fmt="[Checker]%e%m%n" -- ${bindir:=.}/s4u-synchro-barrier 3 --log=s4u_test.thres:critical --log=root.fmt="[App%e%e%e%e]%e%m%n"
> [Checker] Start a DFS exploration. Reduction is: dpor.
> [Checker] There remains 0 actors, but none to interleave (depth 8).
> [Checker] Execution came to an end at 1;3;2;1;2;3;0 (state: 12, depth: 7)
> [Checker] Backtracking from 1;3;2;1;2;3;0
-> [Checker] DFS exploration ended. 12 unique states visited; 2 backtracks (14 transition replays, 1 states visited overall)
\ No newline at end of file
+> [Checker] DFS exploration ended. 12 unique states visited; 1 backtracks (14 transition replays, 1 states visited overall)
\ No newline at end of file
> [Checker] There remains 0 actors, but none to interleave (depth 8).
> [Checker] Execution came to an end at 1;1;2;1;2;2;0 (state: 17, depth: 7)
> [Checker] Backtracking from 1;1;2;1;2;2;0
-> [Checker] DFS exploration ended. 17 unique states visited; 3 backtracks (21 transition replays, 2 states visited overall)
+> [Checker] There remains 0 actors, but none to interleave (depth 8).
+> [Checker] Execution came to an end at 1;1;2;1;2;2;0 (state: 17, depth: 7)
+> [Checker] Backtracking from 1;1;2;1;2;2;0
+> [Checker] DFS exploration ended. 17 unique states visited; 2 backtracks (22 transition replays, 2 states visited overall)
$ ${bindir:=.}/../../../bin/simgrid-mc --cfg=model-check/sleep-set:true -- ${bindir:=.}/s4u-synchro-mutex --cfg=actors:2 --log=s4u_test.thres:critical
> [0.000000] [xbt_cfg/INFO] Configuration change: Set 'model-check/sleep-set' to 'true'
> [0.000000] [xbt_cfg/INFO] Configuration change: Set 'actors' to '2'
> [0.000000] [mc_dfs/INFO] Start a DFS exploration. Reduction is: dpor.
-> [0.000000] [mc_dfs/INFO] DFS exploration ended. 128 unique states visited; 26 backtracks (296 transition replays, 143 states visited overall)
+> [0.000000] [mc_dfs/INFO] DFS exploration ended. 135 unique states visited; 26 backtracks (339 transition replays, 151 states visited overall)
-$ ${bindir:=.}/../../../bin/simgrid-mc --cfg=model-check/sleep-set:true -- ${bindir:=.}/s4u-synchro-mutex --cfg=actors:3 --log=s4u_test.thres:critical
+$ ${bindir:=.}/../../../bin/simgrid-mc --cfg=model-check/sleep-set:true --cfg=model-check/guided-mc:nb_wait -- ${bindir:=.}/s4u-synchro-mutex --cfg=actors:3 --log=s4u_test.thres:critical
> [0.000000] [xbt_cfg/INFO] Configuration change: Set 'model-check/sleep-set' to 'true'
+> [0.000000] [xbt_cfg/INFO] Configuration change: Set 'model-check/guided-mc' to 'nb_wait'
> [0.000000] [xbt_cfg/INFO] Configuration change: Set 'actors' to '3'
> [0.000000] [mc_dfs/INFO] Start a DFS exploration. Reduction is: dpor.
-> [0.000000] [mc_dfs/INFO] DFS exploration ended. 4645 unique states visited; 1082 backtracks (18004 transition replays, 12278 states visited overall)
\ No newline at end of file
+> [0.000000] [mc_dfs/INFO] DFS exploration ended. 5622 unique states visited; 1169 backtracks (21253 transition replays, 13439 states visited overall)
\ No newline at end of file
$ ${bindir:=.}/../../../bin/simgrid-mc --cfg=model-check/sleep-set:true --log=mc_dfs.thres:info --log=root.fmt="[Checker]%e%m%n" -- ${bindir:=.}/s4u-synchro-semaphore --log=sem_test.thres:critical --log=root.fmt="[App%e%e%e%e]%e%m%n"
> [Checker] Configuration change: Set 'model-check/sleep-set' to 'true'
> [Checker] Start a DFS exploration. Reduction is: dpor.
-> [Checker] DFS exploration ended. 33 unique states visited; 9 backtracks (125 transition replays, 84 states visited overall)
+> [Checker] DFS exploration ended. 33 unique states visited; 8 backtracks (125 transition replays, 84 states visited overall)
> [0.000000] [mc_comm_determinism/INFO] The recv communications pattern of the actor 0 is different! Different source for communication #1
> [0.000000] [mc_comm_determinism/INFO] Send-deterministic : Yes
> [0.000000] [mc_comm_determinism/INFO] Recv-deterministic : No
-> [0.000000] [mc_dfs/INFO] DFS exploration ended. 242 unique states visited; 68 backtracks (612 transition replays, 303 states visited overall)
\ No newline at end of file
+> [0.000000] [mc_dfs/INFO] DFS exploration ended. 242 unique states visited; 67 backtracks (625 transition replays, 303 states visited overall)
\ No newline at end of file
> Sent 0 to rank 1
> rank 1 recv the data
> rank 0 recv the data
-> [0.000000] [mc_dfs/INFO] DFS exploration ended. 30 unique states visited; 8 backtracks (56 transition replays, 19 states visited overall)
+> [0.000000] [mc_dfs/INFO] DFS exploration ended. 30 unique states visited; 7 backtracks (56 transition replays, 19 states visited overall)
p Testing the paranoid model
! timeout 60
> [0.000000] [mc_global/INFO] 2: iSend(mbox=0)
> [0.000000] [mc_global/INFO] 0:
> [0.000000] [mc_Session/INFO] You can debug the problem (and see the whole details) by rerunning out of simgrid-mc with --cfg=model-check/replay:'1;2;0'
-> [0.000000] [mc_dfs/INFO] DFS exploration ended. 3 unique states visited; 1 backtracks (3 transition replays, 0 states visited overall)
+> [0.000000] [mc_dfs/INFO] DFS exploration ended. 3 unique states visited; 0 backtracks (3 transition replays, 0 states visited overall)
> Execution failed with code 3.
> The thread 0 is terminating.
> The thread 1 is terminating.
> User's main is terminating.
-> [0.000000] [mc_dfs/INFO] DFS exploration ended. 23 unique states visited; 3 backtracks (27 transition replays, 2 states visited overall)
+> [0.000000] [mc_dfs/INFO] DFS exploration ended. 23 unique states visited; 2 backtracks (28 transition replays, 2 states visited overall)
\ No newline at end of file
> [0.000000] [mc_global/INFO] 3: MUTEX_ASYNC_LOCK(mutex: 0, owner: 2)
> [0.000000] [mc_global/INFO] 0:
> [0.000000] [mc_Session/INFO] You can debug the problem (and see the whole details) by rerunning out of simgrid-mc with --cfg=model-check/replay:'2;2;3;2;3;3;0'
-> [0.000000] [mc_dfs/INFO] DFS exploration ended. 19 unique states visited; 2 backtracks (22 transition replays, 2 states visited overall)
\ No newline at end of file
+> [0.000000] [mc_dfs/INFO] DFS exploration ended. 19 unique states visited; 1 backtracks (22 transition replays, 2 states visited overall)
\ No newline at end of file
> [0.000000] [xbt_cfg/INFO] Configuration change: Set 'model-check/sleep-set' to 'true'
> [0.000000] [sthread/INFO] Starting the simulation.
> [0.000000] [mc_dfs/INFO] Start a DFS exploration. Reduction is: dpor.
-> [0.000000] [mc_dfs/INFO] DFS exploration ended. 719 unique states visited; 83 backtracks (1854 transition replays, 1053 states visited overall)
+> [0.000000] [mc_dfs/INFO] DFS exploration ended. 719 unique states visited; 82 backtracks (1978 transition replays, 1053 states visited overall)
\ No newline at end of file
* + conside_all mark all enabled actor that are not done yet */
void consider_one(aid_t aid) { guide_->consider_one(aid); }
void consider_best() { guide_->consider_best(); }
- void consider_all() { guide_->consider_all(); }
+ unsigned long consider_all() { return guide_->consider_all(); }
bool is_actor_done(aid_t actor) const { return guide_->actors_to_run_.at(actor).is_done(); }
Transition* get_transition() const;
actors_to_run_.at(aid).mark_todo();
}
// Matk as todo all actors enabled that are not done yet
- void consider_all()
+ unsigned long consider_all()
{
+ unsigned long count = 0;
for (auto& [_, actor] : actors_to_run_)
- if (actor.is_enabled() and not actor.is_done())
+ if (actor.is_enabled() and not actor.is_done()) {
actor.mark_todo();
+ count++;
+ }
+ return count;
}
friend class State;
return get_record_trace_of_stack(stack_);
}
+/* Usefull to show debug information */
RecordTrace DFSExplorer::get_record_trace_of_stack(stack_t stack)
{
RecordTrace res;
Exploration::log_state();
}
+/* Copy a given stack by deep-copying it at the State level : this is required so we can backtrack at different
+ * points without interacting with the stacks in the opened_states_ waiting for their turn. On the other hand,
+ * the exploration of one stack in opened_states_ could only slightly modify the sleep set of another stack in
+ * opened_states_, so it is only a slight waste of performance in the exploration. */
void DFSExplorer::add_to_opened_states(stack_t stack)
{
stack_t tmp_stack;
for (auto& state : stack)
tmp_stack.push_back(std::make_shared<State>(State(*state)));
- opened_states_.emplace_back(tmp_stack);
+ opened_states_.emplace(tmp_stack);
}
void DFSExplorer::run()
}
// Search for the next transition
- // next_transition returns a pair<aid_t, double> in case we want to consider multiple state
+ // next_transition returns a pair<aid_t, double> in case we want to consider multiple state (eg. during backtrack)
auto [next, _] = state->next_transition_guided();
if (next < 0) { // If there is no more transition in the current state, backtrack.
this->backtrack();
continue;
}
+
if (_sg_mc_sleep_set && XBT_LOG_ISENABLED(mc_dfs, xbt_log_priority_verbose)) {
XBT_VERB("Sleep set actually containing:");
for (auto& [aid, transition] : state->get_sleep_set())
XBT_VERB(" <%ld,%s>", aid, transition.to_string().c_str());
}
- // if (stack_.back()->count_todo_multiples() <= 1)
- // add_to_opened_states(stack_);
-
/* Actually answer the request: let's execute the selected request (MCed does one step) */
state->execute_next(next, get_remote_app());
on_transition_execute_signal(state->get_transition(), get_remote_app());
XBT_DEBUG("Actor %ld is not enabled: DPOR may be failing. To stay sound, we are marking every enabled "
"transition as todo",
issuer_id);
- prev_state->consider_all();
- add_to_opened_states(tmp_stack);
+ if (prev_state->consider_all() >
+ 0) // If we ended up marking at least a transition, explore it at some point
+ add_to_opened_states(tmp_stack);
}
break;
} else {
}
}
+ // Before leaving that state, if the transition we just took can be taken multiple times, we
+ // need to give it to the opened states
+ if (stack_.back()->count_todo_multiples() > 0)
+ add_to_opened_states(stack_);
+
if (_sg_mc_termination)
this->check_non_termination(next_state.get());
else {
stack_.back()->consider_all();
}
- if (stack_.back()->count_todo_multiples() > 1)
- add_to_opened_states(stack_);
+
dot_output("\"%ld\" -> \"%ld\" [%s];\n", state->get_num(), stack_.back()->get_num(),
state->get_transition()->dot_string().c_str());
} else
visited_state_->original_num_ == -1 ? visited_state_->num_ : visited_state_->original_num_,
state->get_transition()->dot_string().c_str());
}
-
log_state();
}
void DFSExplorer::backtrack()
{
- backtrack_count_++;
XBT_VERB("Backtracking from %s", get_record_trace().to_string().c_str());
XBT_DEBUG("%lu alternatives are yet to be explored:", opened_states_.size());
- for (auto& stack : opened_states_)
- XBT_DEBUG("--> %s", get_record_trace_of_stack(stack).to_string().c_str());
+
on_backtracking_signal(get_remote_app());
get_remote_app().check_deadlock();
// if no backtracking point, then set the stack_ to empty so we can end the exploration
- if (opened_states_.size() == 0) {
+ if (opened_states_.empty()) {
stack_ = std::list<std::shared_ptr<State>>();
return;
}
- /* We may backtrack from somewhere either because it's leaf, or because every enabled process are in done/sleep set.
- * In the first case, we need to remove the last transition corresponding to the Finalize */
- if (stack_.back()->get_transition()->aid_ == 0)
- stack_.pop_back();
-
- stack_t backtrack;
- double min_dist = std::numeric_limits<double>::infinity();
- aid_t min_aid = -1;
- for (auto iter = opened_states_.begin(); iter != opened_states_.end();) {
- auto [aid, dist] = (*iter).back()->next_transition_guided();
- if (aid == -1) { // happens if no actors are todo anymore in this transition
- iter = opened_states_.erase(iter);
- continue;
- }
- if (dist < min_dist) {
- min_dist = dist;
- min_aid = aid;
- backtrack = (*iter);
- }
- iter++;
- }
+ stack_t backtrack = opened_states_.top(); // Take the point with smallest distance
+ opened_states_.pop();
- if (min_aid == -1) {
- stack_ = std::list<std::shared_ptr<State>>();
+ // if the smallest distance corresponded to no enable actor, remove this and let the
+ // exploration ask again for a backtrack
+ if (backtrack.back()->next_transition_guided().first == -1)
return;
- }
- if (backtrack.back()->count_todo_multiples() <= 1)
- opened_states_.remove(backtrack);
+ // We found a real backtracking point, let's go to it
+ backtrack_count_++;
/* If asked to rollback on a state that has a snapshot, restore it */
State* last_state = backtrack.back().get();
typedef std::list<std::shared_ptr<State>> stack_t;
+/* Used to compare two stacks and decide which one is better to backtrack,
+ * regarding the chosen guide in the last state. */
+class OpenedStatesCompare {
+public:
+ bool operator()(stack_t const& lhs, stack_t const& rhs)
+ {
+ return lhs.back()->next_transition_guided().second < rhs.back()->next_transition_guided().second;
+ }
+};
+
class XBT_PRIVATE DFSExplorer : public Exploration {
XBT_DECLARE_ENUM_CLASS(ReductionMode, none, dpor);
/** Opened states are states that still contains todo actors.
* When backtracking, we pick a state from it*/
- std::list<stack_t> opened_states_;
+
+ std::priority_queue<stack_t, std::vector<stack_t>, OpenedStatesCompare> opened_states_;
void add_to_opened_states(stack_t stack);
RecordTrace get_record_trace_of_stack(stack_t stack);
"model-check/guided-mc", "Specify the the kind of heuristic to use for guided model-checking", "none",
[](std::string_view value) {
if (value != "none" && value != "nb_wait")
- xbt_die("configuration option 'model-check/reduction' can only take 'none' or 'dpor' as a value");
+ xbt_die("configuration option 'model-check/guided-mc' can only take 'none' or 'nb_wait' as a value");
}};
> [ 0.000000] (0:maestro@) 1: Random([0;5] ~> 3)
> [ 0.000000] (0:maestro@) 1: Random([0;5] ~> 4)
> [ 0.000000] (0:maestro@) You can debug the problem (and see the whole details) by rerunning out of simgrid-mc with --cfg=model-check/replay:'1/3;1/4'
-> [ 0.000000] (0:maestro@) DFS exploration ended. 31 unique states visited; 24 backtracks (74 transition replays, 19 states visited overall)
+> [ 0.000000] (0:maestro@) DFS exploration ended. 20 unique states visited; 15 backtracks (47 transition replays, 12 states visited overall)
! expect return 6
# because SIMGRID_MC_EXIT_PROGRAM_CRASH = 6
> [ 0.000000] (0:maestro@) 1: Random([0;5] ~> 3)
> [ 0.000000] (0:maestro@) 1: Random([0;5] ~> 4)
> [ 0.000000] (0:maestro@) You can debug the problem (and see the whole details) by rerunning out of simgrid-mc with --cfg=model-check/replay:'1/3;1/4'
-> [ 0.000000] (0:maestro@) DFS exploration ended. 31 unique states visited; 24 backtracks (74 transition replays, 19 states visited overall)
+> [ 0.000000] (0:maestro@) DFS exploration ended. 20 unique states visited; 15 backtracks (47 transition replays, 12 states visited overall)
> [ 0.000000] (0:maestro@) Stack trace not displayed because you passed --log=no_loc
$ ${bindir:=.}/../../../bin/simgrid-mc ${bindir:=.}/random-bug printf ${platfdir}/small_platform.xml "--log=root.fmt:[%10.6r]%e(%i:%a@%h)%e%m%n" --log=xbt_cfg.thresh:warning
> [ 0.000000] (0:maestro@) Behavior: printf
> [ 0.000000] (0:maestro@) Start a DFS exploration. Reduction is: dpor.
> [ 0.000000] (1:app@Fafard) Error reached
-> [ 0.000000] (0:maestro@) DFS exploration ended. 43 unique states visited; 36 backtracks (108 transition replays, 30 states visited overall)
+> [ 0.000000] (0:maestro@) DFS exploration ended. 43 unique states visited; 35 backtracks (109 transition replays, 30 states visited overall)
! expect return 6
# because SIMGRID_MC_EXIT_PROGRAM_CRASH = 6
> [ 0.000000] (0:maestro@) 1: Random([0;5] ~> 3)
> [ 0.000000] (0:maestro@) 1: Random([0;5] ~> 4)
> [ 0.000000] (0:maestro@) You can debug the problem (and see the whole details) by rerunning out of simgrid-mc with --cfg=model-check/replay:'1/3;1/4'
-> [ 0.000000] (0:maestro@) DFS exploration ended. 31 unique states visited; 24 backtracks (74 transition replays, 19 states visited overall)
+> [ 0.000000] (0:maestro@) DFS exploration ended. 20 unique states visited; 15 backtracks (47 transition replays, 12 states visited overall)
> [ 0.000000] (0:maestro@) Stack trace not displayed because you passed --log=no_loc
> If this is too much, consider sharing allocations for computation buffers.
> This can be done automatically by setting --cfg=smpi/auto-shared-malloc-thresh to the minimum size wanted size (this can alter execution if data content is necessary)
>
-> [0.000000] [mc_dfs/INFO] DFS exploration ended. 616 unique states visited; 167 backtracks (3773 transition replays, 2991 states visited overall)
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Probable memory leaks in your code: SMPI detected 8 unfreed MPI handles:
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/WARNING] To get more information (location of allocations), compile your code with -trace-call-location flag of smpicc/f90
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] 4 leaked handles of type MPI_Comm
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] 4 leaked handles of type MPI_Group
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Probable memory leaks in your code: SMPI detected 8 unfreed buffers:
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] leaked allocations of total size 152, called 8 times, with minimum size 16 and maximum size 28
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Memory Usage: Simulated application allocated 152 bytes during its lifetime through malloc/calloc calls.
+> Largest allocation at once from a single process was 28 bytes, at coll-allreduce-with-leaks.c:28. It was called 1 times during the whole simulation.
+> If this is too much, consider sharing allocations for computation buffers.
+> This can be done automatically by setting --cfg=smpi/auto-shared-malloc-thresh to the minimum size wanted size (this can alter execution if data content is necessary)
+>
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Probable memory leaks in your code: SMPI detected 8 unfreed MPI handles:
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/WARNING] To get more information (location of allocations), compile your code with -trace-call-location flag of smpicc/f90
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] 4 leaked handles of type MPI_Comm
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] 4 leaked handles of type MPI_Group
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Probable memory leaks in your code: SMPI detected 8 unfreed buffers:
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] leaked allocations of total size 152, called 8 times, with minimum size 16 and maximum size 28
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Memory Usage: Simulated application allocated 152 bytes during its lifetime through malloc/calloc calls.
+> Largest allocation at once from a single process was 28 bytes, at coll-allreduce-with-leaks.c:28. It was called 1 times during the whole simulation.
+> If this is too much, consider sharing allocations for computation buffers.
+> This can be done automatically by setting --cfg=smpi/auto-shared-malloc-thresh to the minimum size wanted size (this can alter execution if data content is necessary)
+>
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Probable memory leaks in your code: SMPI detected 8 unfreed MPI handles:
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/WARNING] To get more information (location of allocations), compile your code with -trace-call-location flag of smpicc/f90
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] 4 leaked handles of type MPI_Comm
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] 4 leaked handles of type MPI_Group
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Probable memory leaks in your code: SMPI detected 8 unfreed buffers:
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] leaked allocations of total size 152, called 8 times, with minimum size 16 and maximum size 28
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Memory Usage: Simulated application allocated 152 bytes during its lifetime through malloc/calloc calls.
+> Largest allocation at once from a single process was 28 bytes, at coll-allreduce-with-leaks.c:28. It was called 1 times during the whole simulation.
+> If this is too much, consider sharing allocations for computation buffers.
+> This can be done automatically by setting --cfg=smpi/auto-shared-malloc-thresh to the minimum size wanted size (this can alter execution if data content is necessary)
+>
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Probable memory leaks in your code: SMPI detected 8 unfreed MPI handles:
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/WARNING] To get more information (location of allocations), compile your code with -trace-call-location flag of smpicc/f90
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] 4 leaked handles of type MPI_Comm
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] 4 leaked handles of type MPI_Group
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Probable memory leaks in your code: SMPI detected 8 unfreed buffers:
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] leaked allocations of total size 152, called 8 times, with minimum size 16 and maximum size 28
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Memory Usage: Simulated application allocated 152 bytes during its lifetime through malloc/calloc calls.
+> Largest allocation at once from a single process was 28 bytes, at coll-allreduce-with-leaks.c:28. It was called 1 times during the whole simulation.
+> If this is too much, consider sharing allocations for computation buffers.
+> This can be done automatically by setting --cfg=smpi/auto-shared-malloc-thresh to the minimum size wanted size (this can alter execution if data content is necessary)
+>
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Probable memory leaks in your code: SMPI detected 8 unfreed MPI handles:
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/WARNING] To get more information (location of allocations), compile your code with -trace-call-location flag of smpicc/f90
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] 4 leaked handles of type MPI_Comm
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] 4 leaked handles of type MPI_Group
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Probable memory leaks in your code: SMPI detected 8 unfreed buffers:
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] leaked allocations of total size 152, called 8 times, with minimum size 16 and maximum size 28
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Memory Usage: Simulated application allocated 152 bytes during its lifetime through malloc/calloc calls.
+> Largest allocation at once from a single process was 28 bytes, at coll-allreduce-with-leaks.c:28. It was called 1 times during the whole simulation.
+> If this is too much, consider sharing allocations for computation buffers.
+> This can be done automatically by setting --cfg=smpi/auto-shared-malloc-thresh to the minimum size wanted size (this can alter execution if data content is necessary)
+>
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Probable memory leaks in your code: SMPI detected 8 unfreed MPI handles:
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/WARNING] To get more information (location of allocations), compile your code with -trace-call-location flag of smpicc/f90
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] 4 leaked handles of type MPI_Comm
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] 4 leaked handles of type MPI_Group
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Probable memory leaks in your code: SMPI detected 8 unfreed buffers:
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] leaked allocations of total size 152, called 8 times, with minimum size 16 and maximum size 28
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Memory Usage: Simulated application allocated 152 bytes during its lifetime through malloc/calloc calls.
+> Largest allocation at once from a single process was 28 bytes, at coll-allreduce-with-leaks.c:28. It was called 1 times during the whole simulation.
+> If this is too much, consider sharing allocations for computation buffers.
+> This can be done automatically by setting --cfg=smpi/auto-shared-malloc-thresh to the minimum size wanted size (this can alter execution if data content is necessary)
+>
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Probable memory leaks in your code: SMPI detected 8 unfreed MPI handles:
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/WARNING] To get more information (location of allocations), compile your code with -trace-call-location flag of smpicc/f90
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] 4 leaked handles of type MPI_Comm
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] 4 leaked handles of type MPI_Group
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Probable memory leaks in your code: SMPI detected 8 unfreed buffers:
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] leaked allocations of total size 152, called 8 times, with minimum size 16 and maximum size 28
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Memory Usage: Simulated application allocated 152 bytes during its lifetime through malloc/calloc calls.
+> Largest allocation at once from a single process was 28 bytes, at coll-allreduce-with-leaks.c:28. It was called 1 times during the whole simulation.
+> If this is too much, consider sharing allocations for computation buffers.
+> This can be done automatically by setting --cfg=smpi/auto-shared-malloc-thresh to the minimum size wanted size (this can alter execution if data content is necessary)
+>
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Probable memory leaks in your code: SMPI detected 8 unfreed MPI handles:
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/WARNING] To get more information (location of allocations), compile your code with -trace-call-location flag of smpicc/f90
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] 4 leaked handles of type MPI_Comm
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] 4 leaked handles of type MPI_Group
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Probable memory leaks in your code: SMPI detected 8 unfreed buffers:
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] leaked allocations of total size 152, called 8 times, with minimum size 16 and maximum size 28
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Memory Usage: Simulated application allocated 152 bytes during its lifetime through malloc/calloc calls.
+> Largest allocation at once from a single process was 28 bytes, at coll-allreduce-with-leaks.c:28. It was called 1 times during the whole simulation.
+> If this is too much, consider sharing allocations for computation buffers.
+> This can be done automatically by setting --cfg=smpi/auto-shared-malloc-thresh to the minimum size wanted size (this can alter execution if data content is necessary)
+>
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Probable memory leaks in your code: SMPI detected 8 unfreed MPI handles:
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/WARNING] To get more information (location of allocations), compile your code with -trace-call-location flag of smpicc/f90
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] 4 leaked handles of type MPI_Comm
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] 4 leaked handles of type MPI_Group
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Probable memory leaks in your code: SMPI detected 8 unfreed buffers:
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] leaked allocations of total size 152, called 8 times, with minimum size 16 and maximum size 28
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Memory Usage: Simulated application allocated 152 bytes during its lifetime through malloc/calloc calls.
+> Largest allocation at once from a single process was 28 bytes, at coll-allreduce-with-leaks.c:28. It was called 1 times during the whole simulation.
+> If this is too much, consider sharing allocations for computation buffers.
+> This can be done automatically by setting --cfg=smpi/auto-shared-malloc-thresh to the minimum size wanted size (this can alter execution if data content is necessary)
+>
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Probable memory leaks in your code: SMPI detected 8 unfreed MPI handles:
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/WARNING] To get more information (location of allocations), compile your code with -trace-call-location flag of smpicc/f90
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] 4 leaked handles of type MPI_Comm
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] 4 leaked handles of type MPI_Group
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Probable memory leaks in your code: SMPI detected 8 unfreed buffers:
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] leaked allocations of total size 152, called 8 times, with minimum size 16 and maximum size 28
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Memory Usage: Simulated application allocated 152 bytes during its lifetime through malloc/calloc calls.
+> Largest allocation at once from a single process was 28 bytes, at coll-allreduce-with-leaks.c:28. It was called 1 times during the whole simulation.
+> If this is too much, consider sharing allocations for computation buffers.
+> This can be done automatically by setting --cfg=smpi/auto-shared-malloc-thresh to the minimum size wanted size (this can alter execution if data content is necessary)
+>
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Probable memory leaks in your code: SMPI detected 8 unfreed MPI handles:
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/WARNING] To get more information (location of allocations), compile your code with -trace-call-location flag of smpicc/f90
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] 4 leaked handles of type MPI_Comm
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] 4 leaked handles of type MPI_Group
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Probable memory leaks in your code: SMPI detected 8 unfreed buffers:
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] leaked allocations of total size 152, called 8 times, with minimum size 16 and maximum size 28
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Memory Usage: Simulated application allocated 152 bytes during its lifetime through malloc/calloc calls.
+> Largest allocation at once from a single process was 28 bytes, at coll-allreduce-with-leaks.c:28. It was called 1 times during the whole simulation.
+> If this is too much, consider sharing allocations for computation buffers.
+> This can be done automatically by setting --cfg=smpi/auto-shared-malloc-thresh to the minimum size wanted size (this can alter execution if data content is necessary)
+>
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Probable memory leaks in your code: SMPI detected 8 unfreed MPI handles:
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/WARNING] To get more information (location of allocations), compile your code with -trace-call-location flag of smpicc/f90
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] 4 leaked handles of type MPI_Comm
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] 4 leaked handles of type MPI_Group
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Probable memory leaks in your code: SMPI detected 8 unfreed buffers:
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] leaked allocations of total size 152, called 8 times, with minimum size 16 and maximum size 28
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Memory Usage: Simulated application allocated 152 bytes during its lifetime through malloc/calloc calls.
+> Largest allocation at once from a single process was 28 bytes, at coll-allreduce-with-leaks.c:28. It was called 1 times during the whole simulation.
+> If this is too much, consider sharing allocations for computation buffers.
+> This can be done automatically by setting --cfg=smpi/auto-shared-malloc-thresh to the minimum size wanted size (this can alter execution if data content is necessary)
+>
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Probable memory leaks in your code: SMPI detected 8 unfreed MPI handles:
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/WARNING] To get more information (location of allocations), compile your code with -trace-call-location flag of smpicc/f90
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] 4 leaked handles of type MPI_Comm
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] 4 leaked handles of type MPI_Group
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Probable memory leaks in your code: SMPI detected 8 unfreed buffers:
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] leaked allocations of total size 152, called 8 times, with minimum size 16 and maximum size 28
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Memory Usage: Simulated application allocated 152 bytes during its lifetime through malloc/calloc calls.
+> Largest allocation at once from a single process was 28 bytes, at coll-allreduce-with-leaks.c:28. It was called 1 times during the whole simulation.
+> If this is too much, consider sharing allocations for computation buffers.
+> This can be done automatically by setting --cfg=smpi/auto-shared-malloc-thresh to the minimum size wanted size (this can alter execution if data content is necessary)
+>
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Probable memory leaks in your code: SMPI detected 8 unfreed MPI handles:
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/WARNING] To get more information (location of allocations), compile your code with -trace-call-location flag of smpicc/f90
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] 4 leaked handles of type MPI_Comm
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] 4 leaked handles of type MPI_Group
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Probable memory leaks in your code: SMPI detected 8 unfreed buffers:
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] leaked allocations of total size 152, called 8 times, with minimum size 16 and maximum size 28
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Memory Usage: Simulated application allocated 152 bytes during its lifetime through malloc/calloc calls.
+> Largest allocation at once from a single process was 28 bytes, at coll-allreduce-with-leaks.c:28. It was called 1 times during the whole simulation.
+> If this is too much, consider sharing allocations for computation buffers.
+> This can be done automatically by setting --cfg=smpi/auto-shared-malloc-thresh to the minimum size wanted size (this can alter execution if data content is necessary)
+>
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Probable memory leaks in your code: SMPI detected 8 unfreed MPI handles:
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/WARNING] To get more information (location of allocations), compile your code with -trace-call-location flag of smpicc/f90
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] 4 leaked handles of type MPI_Comm
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] 4 leaked handles of type MPI_Group
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Probable memory leaks in your code: SMPI detected 8 unfreed buffers:
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] leaked allocations of total size 152, called 8 times, with minimum size 16 and maximum size 28
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Memory Usage: Simulated application allocated 152 bytes during its lifetime through malloc/calloc calls.
+> Largest allocation at once from a single process was 28 bytes, at coll-allreduce-with-leaks.c:28. It was called 1 times during the whole simulation.
+> If this is too much, consider sharing allocations for computation buffers.
+> This can be done automatically by setting --cfg=smpi/auto-shared-malloc-thresh to the minimum size wanted size (this can alter execution if data content is necessary)
+>
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Probable memory leaks in your code: SMPI detected 8 unfreed MPI handles:
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/WARNING] To get more information (location of allocations), compile your code with -trace-call-location flag of smpicc/f90
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] 4 leaked handles of type MPI_Comm
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] 4 leaked handles of type MPI_Group
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Probable memory leaks in your code: SMPI detected 8 unfreed buffers:
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] leaked allocations of total size 152, called 8 times, with minimum size 16 and maximum size 28
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Memory Usage: Simulated application allocated 152 bytes during its lifetime through malloc/calloc calls.
+> Largest allocation at once from a single process was 28 bytes, at coll-allreduce-with-leaks.c:28. It was called 1 times during the whole simulation.
+> If this is too much, consider sharing allocations for computation buffers.
+> This can be done automatically by setting --cfg=smpi/auto-shared-malloc-thresh to the minimum size wanted size (this can alter execution if data content is necessary)
+>
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Probable memory leaks in your code: SMPI detected 8 unfreed MPI handles:
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/WARNING] To get more information (location of allocations), compile your code with -trace-call-location flag of smpicc/f90
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] 4 leaked handles of type MPI_Comm
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] 4 leaked handles of type MPI_Group
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Probable memory leaks in your code: SMPI detected 8 unfreed buffers:
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] leaked allocations of total size 152, called 8 times, with minimum size 16 and maximum size 28
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Memory Usage: Simulated application allocated 152 bytes during its lifetime through malloc/calloc calls.
+> Largest allocation at once from a single process was 28 bytes, at coll-allreduce-with-leaks.c:28. It was called 1 times during the whole simulation.
+> If this is too much, consider sharing allocations for computation buffers.
+> This can be done automatically by setting --cfg=smpi/auto-shared-malloc-thresh to the minimum size wanted size (this can alter execution if data content is necessary)
+>
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Probable memory leaks in your code: SMPI detected 8 unfreed MPI handles:
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/WARNING] To get more information (location of allocations), compile your code with -trace-call-location flag of smpicc/f90
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] 4 leaked handles of type MPI_Comm
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] 4 leaked handles of type MPI_Group
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Probable memory leaks in your code: SMPI detected 8 unfreed buffers:
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] leaked allocations of total size 152, called 8 times, with minimum size 16 and maximum size 28
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Memory Usage: Simulated application allocated 152 bytes during its lifetime through malloc/calloc calls.
+> Largest allocation at once from a single process was 28 bytes, at coll-allreduce-with-leaks.c:28. It was called 1 times during the whole simulation.
+> If this is too much, consider sharing allocations for computation buffers.
+> This can be done automatically by setting --cfg=smpi/auto-shared-malloc-thresh to the minimum size wanted size (this can alter execution if data content is necessary)
+>
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Probable memory leaks in your code: SMPI detected 8 unfreed MPI handles:
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/WARNING] To get more information (location of allocations), compile your code with -trace-call-location flag of smpicc/f90
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] 4 leaked handles of type MPI_Comm
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] 4 leaked handles of type MPI_Group
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Probable memory leaks in your code: SMPI detected 8 unfreed buffers:
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] leaked allocations of total size 152, called 8 times, with minimum size 16 and maximum size 28
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Memory Usage: Simulated application allocated 152 bytes during its lifetime through malloc/calloc calls.
+> Largest allocation at once from a single process was 28 bytes, at coll-allreduce-with-leaks.c:28. It was called 1 times during the whole simulation.
+> If this is too much, consider sharing allocations for computation buffers.
+> This can be done automatically by setting --cfg=smpi/auto-shared-malloc-thresh to the minimum size wanted size (this can alter execution if data content is necessary)
+>
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Probable memory leaks in your code: SMPI detected 8 unfreed MPI handles:
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/WARNING] To get more information (location of allocations), compile your code with -trace-call-location flag of smpicc/f90
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] 4 leaked handles of type MPI_Comm
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] 4 leaked handles of type MPI_Group
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Probable memory leaks in your code: SMPI detected 8 unfreed buffers:
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] leaked allocations of total size 152, called 8 times, with minimum size 16 and maximum size 28
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Memory Usage: Simulated application allocated 152 bytes during its lifetime through malloc/calloc calls.
+> Largest allocation at once from a single process was 28 bytes, at coll-allreduce-with-leaks.c:28. It was called 1 times during the whole simulation.
+> If this is too much, consider sharing allocations for computation buffers.
+> This can be done automatically by setting --cfg=smpi/auto-shared-malloc-thresh to the minimum size wanted size (this can alter execution if data content is necessary)
+>
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Probable memory leaks in your code: SMPI detected 8 unfreed MPI handles:
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/WARNING] To get more information (location of allocations), compile your code with -trace-call-location flag of smpicc/f90
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] 4 leaked handles of type MPI_Comm
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] 4 leaked handles of type MPI_Group
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Probable memory leaks in your code: SMPI detected 8 unfreed buffers:
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] leaked allocations of total size 152, called 8 times, with minimum size 16 and maximum size 28
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Memory Usage: Simulated application allocated 152 bytes during its lifetime through malloc/calloc calls.
+> Largest allocation at once from a single process was 28 bytes, at coll-allreduce-with-leaks.c:28. It was called 1 times during the whole simulation.
+> If this is too much, consider sharing allocations for computation buffers.
+> This can be done automatically by setting --cfg=smpi/auto-shared-malloc-thresh to the minimum size wanted size (this can alter execution if data content is necessary)
+>
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Probable memory leaks in your code: SMPI detected 8 unfreed MPI handles:
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/WARNING] To get more information (location of allocations), compile your code with -trace-call-location flag of smpicc/f90
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] 4 leaked handles of type MPI_Comm
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] 4 leaked handles of type MPI_Group
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Probable memory leaks in your code: SMPI detected 8 unfreed buffers:
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] leaked allocations of total size 152, called 8 times, with minimum size 16 and maximum size 28
+> [0.000000] [smpi_utils/INFO] Memory Usage: Simulated application allocated 152 bytes during its lifetime through malloc/calloc calls.
+> Largest allocation at once from a single process was 28 bytes, at coll-allreduce-with-leaks.c:28. It was called 1 times during the whole simulation.
+> If this is too much, consider sharing allocations for computation buffers.
+> This can be done automatically by setting --cfg=smpi/auto-shared-malloc-thresh to the minimum size wanted size (this can alter execution if data content is necessary)
+>
+> [0.000000] [mc_dfs/INFO] DFS exploration ended. 891 unique states visited; 236 backtracks (5614 transition replays, 4388 states visited overall)
\ No newline at end of file
