I am trying to write a code using lapacke libraries to invert a complex matrix in C. However I am stuck with a segmentation fault which seems to depend on the size N of the matrix. What's more is that the size for which the segmentation fault happens varies each time I compile the program or I touch anything. This makes me think that somewhere the code is trying to access badly allocated or forbidden memory. Unfortunately, I dont' understand how this happens since it seems to be related with the LAPACKE functions themeselves. In fact, when the function /*MatrixComplexInv(invA,A,N);*/ ( in which the LAPACKE functions are called for the inversion) is commented the segmentation fault doesn't happen.
Below there is the working code that can be compiled and run on its own.
#include <stdio.h>
#include <lapacke.h>
#include <complex.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <math.h>
void Ctranspose( double complex *, double complex * ,int );
void MatrixComplexInv(double complex *, double complex *, int );
int main(int argc, const char * * argv) {
int i,j,k,N = 4;/*if N> bigger than a small number 4,6,7.. it gives segmentation fault*/
double complex *A = calloc(N*N,sizeof(double complex)),
*b = calloc(N*N,sizeof(double complex)),
*Ap =calloc(N*N,sizeof(double complex));
double complex *invA =calloc(N*N,sizeof(double complex));
for(i=0;i<N;i++){
for(j=0;j<N;j++){
A[i*N+j] = 1+sin(i*j)*i+I*j;
Ap[i*N+j] = 1+sin(i*j)*i+I*j;
}
}
/*Segmentation fault in this function, due to
*
LAPACKE_zgetrf(LAPACK_ROW_MAJOR, n, n, tempA , n,&n);
LAPACKE_zgetri(LAPACK_ROW_MAJOR, n, tempA , n, &n );
*
* both.
*/
MatrixComplexInv(invA,A,N);
for(i=0;i<N;i++){
for(j=0;j<N;j++){
for(k = 0;k<N;k++){
b[i*N+j]+=invA[i*N + k]*Ap[k*N + j];
}
printf("(%lf,%lf)\t", creal(b[i*N + j]),cimag(b[i*N + j]));/*tests that the result produces the inverse matrix A^{-1}A = 1*/
}
printf("\n");
}
return 0;
}
void Ctranspose( double complex *Transposed, double complex *M ,int n)
{
int i,j;
for(i=0;i<n;i++)
for(j=0;j<n;j++) Transposed[i+n*j] = M[i*n+j];
}
void MatrixComplexInv(double complex *invA, double complex *A, int n)
{
double complex *tempA = (double complex*) malloc( n*n*sizeof(double complex) );
Ctranspose(tempA,A,n);
/*SEGMENTATION HAPPEN IN THESE TWO FUNCTIONS*/
LAPACKE_zgetrf(LAPACK_ROW_MAJOR, n, n, tempA , n,&n);
LAPACKE_zgetri(LAPACK_ROW_MAJOR, n, tempA , n, &n );
Ctranspose(invA,tempA,n);
free(tempA);
}
In LAPACKE_zgetrf(LAPACK_ROW_MAJOR, n, n, tempA , n,&n);, the last argument of LAPACKE_zgetrf points to n, a single integer. On the contrary, the argument ipiv should be a pointer to an array of integer of dimension max(m,n), to store pivot indices This could explain a segmentation fault.
The ipiv computed by LAPACKE_zgetrf() must also be provided to LAPACKE_zgetri() as input, to get the correct inverse matrix.
Related
So I am now rewriting my fortran code in C (to use CUDA), and apparently I do not understand how to properly use malloc and pointers. I am trying to make the main function just calls to other functions, which need to malloc arrays that will then be used inside other functions. So, I am passing pointers of pointers to them as per this post: C Programming: malloc() inside another function
But the right amount of memory is not being allocated so I get segmentation faults. Here is the code:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
//#include <cuda.h>
#include <math.h>
//#include "cublas.h"
//datatype to match FORTRAN complex type
typedef float real;
typedef struct{
int nx;
int ny;
int nz;
int sz;
int tz;
} states;
void set_SPB(real **,int,states **,states **,int **);
//void set_SPB();
int find_minimum(int a[], int n,int start);
const real hc =197.32697,pi=3.1415927;
int main(){
int nmax = 2, A = 28;
real *etemp, *fock;
int *Ndex,*lookup,*lookup_a;
states *channel,*SPB;
//!generates the single particle basis to be used
set_SPB(&etemp,nmax,&SPB,&channel,&Ndex);
free(etemp);
free(Ndex);
free(SPB);
return 0;
}
void set_SPB(real **etemp,int nmax,states **SPB,states **channel,int **Ndex){
int tot_orbs = (2*nmax+1)*(2*nmax+1)*(2*nmax+1)*4;
int D = tot_orbs/4;
int Nalpha = (2*nmax+1)*(2*nmax+1)*(2*nmax+1)*9;
real E;
*etemp = (real*)malloc(D);
*Ndex = (int*)malloc(D*3);
*SPB = (states*)malloc(tot_orbs);
printf("orbits without spin degeneracy %d \n",D);
printf("size of etemp %ld \n",sizeof(*etemp)/sizeof(*etemp[0]));
return;
int i = 0;
for(int nx =-nmax;nx<=nmax;nx++){
for(int ny =-nmax;ny<=nmax;ny++){
for(int nz =-nmax;nz<=nmax;nz++){
E = 0.5*4.0*pi*pi*(nx*nx+ny*ny+nz*nz);
//printf("%d\n",i);
*etemp[i] = E;
*Ndex[0*D+i] =nx;
*Ndex[1*D+i] = ny;
*Ndex[2*D+i] = nz;
i+=1;
}
}
}
return;
}
Also I am not sure exactly if my assignments of the arrays are correct.
Specifically the print to find the number of elements of that have been allocated always gives 2, when it should be D = 125.
I cannot believe that float and int take only 1 byte in your environment.
Multiply the size to be allocated by size of their elements.
*etemp = malloc(sizeof(**etemp) * D);
*Ndex = malloc(sizeof(**Ndex) * D*3);
*SPB = malloc(sizeof(**SPB) * tot_orbs); /* not sure because this is not used */
Note that they say you shouldn't cast the result of malloc() in C.
Also note that [] operator has higher precedence than * operator, so you have to use parentheses to use the arrays.
(*etemp)[i] = E;
(*Ndex)[0*D+i] =nx;
(*Ndex)[1*D+i] = ny;
(*Ndex)[2*D+i] = nz;
I am trying for the first time to use LAPACK from C to diagonalize a matrix and I am stuck.
I have been trying to modify this example http://rcabreral.blogspot.co.uk/2010/05/eigenvalues-clapack.html from zgeev to dgeev. I have looked at the DGEEV input parameters, http://www.netlib.org/lapack/explore-html/d9/d28/dgeev_8f.html but it seems I don't understand the well enough.
Hence, the code below produces:
**** On entry to DGEEV parameter number 9 had an illegal value**
EDIT: The error occurs in the call of dgeev spanning lines 48 to (including) 53.
EDIT: Note that the arguments differ from the specifications here
http://www.netlib.org/lapack/explore-html/d9/d28/dgeev_8f.html
in that they have been translated to pointers. That is necessary when using these Fortran routines in C, as explained here:
http://www.physics.orst.edu/~rubin/nacphy/lapack/cprogp.html
#include <stdio.h>
#include <math.h>
#include <complex.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
//.........................................................................
void dgeTranspose( double *Transposed, double *M ,int n) {
int i,j;
for(i=0;i<n;i++)
for(j=0;j<n;j++)
Transposed[i+n*j] = M[i*n+j];
}
//.........................................................................
// MatrixComplexEigensystem: computes the eigenvectors and eigenValues of input matrix A
// The eigenvectors are stored in columns
//.........................................................................
void MatrixComplexEigensystem( double *eigenvectorsVR, double *eigenvaluesW, double *A, int N){
int i;
double *AT = (double *) malloc( N*N*sizeof(double ) );
dgeTranspose( AT, A , N);
char JOBVL ='N'; // Compute Right eigenvectors
char JOBVR ='V'; // Do not compute Left eigenvectors
double VL[1];
int LDVL = 1;
int LDVR = N;
int LWORK = 4*N;
double *WORK = (double *)malloc( LWORK*sizeof(double));
double *RWORK = (double *)malloc( 2*N*sizeof(double));
int INFO;
dgeev_( &JOBVL, &JOBVR, &N, AT , &N , eigenvaluesW ,
VL, &LDVL,
eigenvectorsVR, &LDVR,
WORK,
&LWORK, RWORK, &INFO );
dgeTranspose( AT, eigenvectorsVR , N);
for(i=0;i<N*N;i++) eigenvectorsVR[i]=AT[i];
free(WORK);
free(RWORK);
free(AT);
}
int main(){
int i,j;
const int N = 3;
double A[] = { 1.+I , 2. , 3 , 4. , 5.+I , 6. , 7., 8., 9. + I};
double eigenVectors[N*N];
double eigenValues[N];
MatrixComplexEigensystem( eigenVectors, eigenValues, A, N);
printf("\nEigenvectors\n");
for(i=0;i<N;i++){
for(j=0;j<N;j++) printf("%e", eigenVectors[i*N + j]);
printf("\n");
}
printf("\nEigenvalues \n");
for(i=0;i<N;i++) printf("%e", eigenValues[i] );
printf("\n------------------------------------------------------------\n");
return 0;
}
You can not port directly from zgeev to dgeev. The zgeev gets a complex matrix and computes complex eigenvalues. While dgeev gets a real matrix and computes complex eigenvalues. In order to be consistent LAPACK uses WR and WI which is used for the real and imaginary part of each eigenvalue.
So note that dgeev definition is
void dgeev_(char* JOBVL, char* JOBVR, int* N, double* A, int* LDA, double* WR, double* WI, double* VL, int* LDVL, double* VR, int* LDVR, double* WORK, int* LWORK, int* INFO);
My suggestion for your example is to remove:
#include <complex.h>
remove I's from matrix of doubles:
double A[] = { 1. , 2. , 3 , 4. , 5. , 6. , 7., 8., 9.};
then double the size of eigenvalues vector:
double eigenValues[2*N];
and call dgeev using WR and WI:
double *eigenvaluesWR = eigenvaluesW;
double *eigenvaluesWI = eigenvaluesW+N;
dgeev_(&JOBVL, &JOBVR, &N, AT, &N,
eigenvaluesWR, eigenvaluesWI,
VL, &LDVL,
eigenvectorsVR, &LDVR,
WORK, &LWORK, &INFO);
I have a problem with a c code i am writing. It has to multiply 2 matrix (filled with randoms integers between 0-9) of a given dimension (mxn multiplied by nxm and the result being an mxm matrix). The matrix are filled by columns. Also i have to output the computing times for both the whole program and the execution of the function that does the calculation.
I am getting an "glibc detected" error while executing the application. I do know that it is due to heap corruption in my program, most likely due to having written outside memory on the malloc'ed arrays by I am unable the find where the error is.
Here is the code:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <time.h>
#define A(i,j) aa[m*(j)+(i)] //matrix by columns
#define B(i,j) bb[n*(j)+(i)]
#define C(i,j) cc[m*(j)+(i)]
void mmul (int m, int n, double *aa, double *bb, double *cc) {
int i, j, k;
for (i=0; i<m; i++)
for (j=0; j<m; j++) {
C(i,j)=0;
for (k=0; k<n; k++) C(i,j)+=A(i,k)*B(k,j);
}
}
int main (int argc, char *argv[]) {
clock_t exec_timer=clock(), comp_timer;
srand(time(NULL)); //initialize random seed
int m, n, i;
double *aa, *bb, *cc, exec_time, comp_time;
if (argc!=3
|| sscanf(argv[1], "%d", &m)!=1
|| sscanf(argv[2], "%d", &n)!=1
) {
fprintf(stderr, "%s m n \n", argv[0]);
return -1;
}
/* malloc memory */
aa=malloc(m*n*sizeof(int)); //integer matrix
bb=malloc(n*m*sizeof(int));
cc=malloc(m*m*sizeof(int));
/* fill matrix */
for (i=0; i<m*n; i++) aa[i]=rand()%10; //fill with random integers 0-9
for (i=0; i<n*m; i++) bb[i]=rand()%10;
/* compute product */
comp_timer=clock();
mmul(m,n,aa,bb,cc);
comp_time=(double) (clock() - comp_timer) / CLOCKS_PER_SEC;
/* write output */
for (i=0; i<m*m; i++) printf("%i\n",cc[i]);
/* finishing */
free(aa); free(bb); free(cc);
exec_time=(double) (clock() - exec_timer) / CLOCKS_PER_SEC;
printf("exec time = %.3f, comp = %.3f\n", exec_time, comp_time);
return 0;
}
#undef C
#undef B
#undef A
Anyone can see the problem I am missing?
Well, yes, I can see the problem.
You are working with arrays of double, but your allocation code uses int. Since typically a double is twice the size of an int, this leads to horrible amounts of buffer overflow, trashing random memory.
Basically, this:
aa=malloc(m*n*sizeof(int)); //integer matrix
is lying. :) It should be:
aa = malloc(m * n * sizeof *aa); /* Not an integer matrix! aa is double *. */
And the same for the allocations of bb and cc, of course.
Note use of sizeof *aa (meaning "the size of the value pointed at by the pointer aa") to remove the risk of introducing this error, i.e. by not repeating the type manually but instead "locking" it to an actual pointer, you make the code safer.
As a minor note, not related to the problem, you should use const for the read-only arguments to mmul(), like so:
void mmul (int m, int n, const double *aa, const double *bb, double *cc)
That immediately makes it obvious which pointer(s) are inputs, and which is output. It can also help the compiler generate better code, but the main advantage is that it communicates much more clearly what you mean.
Okay. My original question turned out to be caused by not initializing some arrays. The original issue had to do with code crashing R. When I was trying to debug it by commenting things out, I by mistake commented out the lines that initialized the arrays. So I thought my problem had to do with passing pointers.
The actual problem is this. As I said before, I want to use outer_pos to calculate outer differences and pass both the pointers of the results and the total number of positive differences back to a function that calls outer_pos
#include <R.h>
#include <Rmath.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <math.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
void outer_pos(double *x, double *y, int *n, double *output){
int i, j, l=0;
for(i=0; i<*n; i++){
for(j=0; j<*n; j++){
if((x[j]-x[i])>0){
output[l+1]=(y[j]-y[i])/(x[j]-x[i]);
output[0]=(double)(++l);
}
}
}
Rprintf("%d\n", (int)output[0]);
}
void foo1(double *x, double *y, int *nsamp){
int i, j, k, oper=2, l;
double* v1v2=malloc(sizeof(double)*((*nsamp)*(*nsamp-1)/2 + 1));
outer_pos(x, y, nsamp, &v1v2[0]);
double v1v2b[1999000]; // <--------------HERE
for(i=1; i<= (int)v1v2[0]; i++){
v1v2b[i-1]=1;
}
}
Suppose foo1 is the function that calls outer_pos. Here I specified the size of the array v1v2b using an actual number 1999000. This value corresponds to the number of positive differences. Calling foo1 from R causes no problem. It's all fine.
In the scenario above, I know the number of positive differences, so I can use the actual value to set the array size. But I would like to accommodate situations where I don't necessarily know the value. foo2 below is intended to do that. As you can see, v1v2b is initialized using the first value of the array v1v2. Recall that the first slot of the output of outer_pos stores the number of positive differences. So basically I use this value to set v1v2's size. However, calling this function in R causes R to either show a stack overflow error or causes it to crash (see screen shot below)
void foo2(double *x, double *y, int *nsamp){
int i, j, k, oper=2, l;
double* v1v2=malloc(sizeof(double)*((*nsamp)*(*nsamp-1)/2 + 1));
outer_pos(x, y, nsamp, &v1v2[0]);
double v1v2b[(int)v1v2[0]]; //<--------HERE
for(i=1; i<= (int)v1v2[0]; i++){
v1v2b[i-1]=1;
}
}
So I thought, maybe it has to do with indexation. Maybe the actual size of v1v2b is too small, or something, so the loop iterates outside the bound. So I created foo2b in which I commented out the loop, and use Rprintf to print the first slot of v1v2 to see if the value stored in it is correct. But it seems that the value v1v2[0] is correct, namely 1999000. So I don't know what is happening here.
Sorry for the confusion with my previous question!!
void foo2b(double *x, double *y, int *nsamp){
int i, j, k, oper=2, l;
double* v1v2=malloc(sizeof(double)*((*nsamp)*(*nsamp-1)/2 + 1));
outer_pos(x, y, nsamp, &v1v2[0]);
double v1v2b[(int)v1v2[0]]; //<----Array size declared by a variable
Rprintf("%d", (int)v1v2[0]);
//for(i=1; i<= (int)v1v2[0]; i++){
//v1v2b[i-1]=v1v2[i];
//}
}
R code to run the code above:
x=rnorm(2000)
y=rnorm(2000)
.C("foo1", x=as.double(x), y=as.double(y), nsamp=as.integer(2000))
.C("foo2", x=as.double(x), y=as.double(y), nsamp=as.integer(2000))
.C("foo2b", x=as.double(x), y=as.double(y), nsamp=as.integer(2000))
** FOLLOW UP **
I modified my code based on Martin's suggestion to check if the stack overflow issue can be resolved:
void foo2b(double *x, double *y, int *nsamp) {
int n = *nsamp, i;
double *v1v2, *v1v2b;
v1v2 = (double *) R_alloc(n * (n - 1) / 2 + 1, sizeof(double));
/* outer_pos(x, y, nsamp, v1v2); */
v1v2b = (double *) R_alloc((size_t) v1v2[0], sizeof(int));
for(i=0; i< (int)v1v2[0]; i++){
v1v2b[i]=1;
}
//qsort(v1v2b, (size_t) v1v2[0], sizeof(double), mycompare);
/* ... */
}
After compiling it, I ran the code:
x=rnorm(1000)
y=rnorm(1000)
.C("foo2b", x=as.double(x), y=as.double(y), nsamp=as.integer(length(x)))
And got an error message:
Error: cannot allocate memory block of size 34359738368.0 Gb
** FOLLOW UP 2 **
It seems that the error message shows up every other run of the function. At least it did not crash R...So basically function alternates between running with no problem and showing an error message.
(I included both headers in my script file).
As before, you're allocating on the stack, but should be allocating from the heap. Correct this using malloc / free as you did in your previous question (actually, I think the recommended approach is Calloc / Free or if your code returns to R simply R_alloc; R_alloc automatically recovers the memory when returning to R, even in the case of an error that R catches).
qsort is mentioned in a comment. It takes as its final argument a user-supplied function that defines how its first argument is to be sorted. The signature of qsort (from man qsort) is
void qsort(void *base, size_t nmemb, size_t size,
int(*compar)(const void *, const void *));
with the final argument being 'a pointer to a function that takes two constant void pointers and returns an int'. A function satisfying this signature and sorting pointers to two doubles according to the specification on the man page is
int mycompare(const void *p1, const void *p2)
{
const double d1 = *(const double *) p1,
d2 = *(const double *) p2;
return d1 < d2 ? -1 : (d2 > d1 ? 1 : 0);
}
So
#include <Rdefines.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
int mycompare(const void *p1, const void *p2)
{
const double d1 = *(const double *) p1,
d2 = *(const double *) p2;
return d1 < d2 ? -1 : (d2 > d1 ? 1 : 0);
}
void outer_pos(double *x, double *y, int *n, double *output){
int i, j, l = 0;
for (i = 0; i < *n; i++) {
for (j = 0; j < *n; j++) {
if ((x[j] - x[i]) > 0) {
output[l + 1] = (y[j] - y[i]) / (x[j] - x[i]);
output[0] = (double)(++l);
}
}
}
}
void foo2b(double *x, double *y, int *nsamp) {
int n = *nsamp;
double *v1v2, *v1v2b;
v1v2 = (double *) R_alloc(n * (n - 1) / 2 + 1, sizeof(double));
outer_pos(x, y, nsamp, v1v2);
v1v2b = (double *) R_alloc((size_t) v1v2[0], sizeof(double));
qsort(v1v2b, (size_t) v1v2[0], sizeof(double), mycompare);
/* ... */
}
When foo2b calls outer_pos, it is passing two allocated but uninitialized arrays as x and y. You can't depend on their contents, thus you have different results from different invocations.
Edit
You're dangerously close to your stack size with 1999000 doubles, which take just over 15.25MB, and that's because you're on Mac OS. On most other platforms, threads don't get anywhere near 16M of stack.
You don't start out with a clean (empty) stack when you call this function -- you're deep into R functions, each creating frames that take space on the stack.
Edit 2
Below, you are using an uninitialized value v1v2[0] as an argument to R-alloc. That you get an error sometimes (and not always) is not a surprise.
v1v2 = (double *) R_alloc(n * (n - 1) / 2 + 1, sizeof(double));
/* outer_pos(x, y, nsamp, v1v2); */
v1v2b = (double *) R_alloc((size_t) v1v2[0], sizeof(int));
I am writing a n x n matrix multiplication program in C where a[][] and b[][] are the inputs and x[][] is the output. a, b and x are malloc'd but I am unsure how to pass the pointers to the multiplication function correctly. below is an outline of what i am trying to do
void multiplication(float a, float b, float x, int n);
void main() {
float **a, **b, **x;
int n; // size of arrays (n x n)
multiplication(a, b, x, n);
}
void multiplication(float a, float b, float x, int n) {
// function
}
You want void multiplication(float *a, float *b, float *x, int n);. Note that generally you should use size_t for indexes and array sizes, and double as your preferred floating point type unless you have specific reason to use float.
Each of a, b and x point to contiguous float values, you will want to dereference these using a[n * x + y].
C99 introduces all kinds of interesting optimization possibilities on top of this, all of which you pretty much can't rely upon in any compiler I know of:
Variable Length Arrays in GCC
Arrays in XL C/C++ V7.0 (for AIX)
With those, something like this should be possible:
void multiplication(size_t len; // <- semicolon not a mistake
double a[len][restrict const len],
double b[len][restrict const len],
double c[len][restrict const len]);
This pedantic construction would indicate to the compiler that the length of the arrays are are the same, they're 2D, and the sizes are indicated from the calling code at runtime. Furthermore all the arrays are cacheable as they don't alias one another.
One can only dream that C continues to be advanced, C99 still isn't fully supported, and many other improvements haven't become mainstream.
you have to pass the address of first element of both matrix in multiplication method
actually the thing is that the elements of an array is arranged like queue means one element after another. so if you know the address of first element then you just increase the index number and you easily get all member of that array.
check this
it might be help you
Well, you must understand pointers for doing this kind of things in C. Here's a simple code:
int n = 10;
float * multiply ( float *a, float *b ) {
float *ans;
int i, j, k;
ans = malloc(sizeof(float)*n*n);
for (i=0; i<n; ++i)
for (j=0; j<n; ++j) {
ans[i*n+j] = 0.0;
for (k=0; k<n; ++k)
ans[i*n+j] += a[i*n+k] * b[k*n+j];
}
return ans;
}
int main() {
float *a, *b, *ans;
a = malloc(sizeof(float)*n*n);
input(&a);
b = malloc(sizeof(float)*n*n);
input(&b);
ans = multiply(a,b);
output(ans);
return 0;
}
If you have trouble understanding the code, please try to brush up your pointer skills. And you can always ask us.
Here is a nice easy way to pass dynamically allocated arrays to a function.
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
void Function(int ***Array);
int main()
{
int i, j, k, n=10;
//Declare array, and allocate memory using malloc. ( Dimensions will be 10 x 10 x 10)
int ***Array=(int***)malloc(n*sizeof(int**));
for (i=0; i<n; i++)
{
Array[i]=(int**)malloc(n*sizeof(int*));
for (j=0; j<n; j++)
{
Array[i][j]=(int*)malloc(n*sizeof(int));
}
}
//Initialize array in a way that allows us to check it easily (i*j+k).
for (i=0; i<n; i++)
{
for (j=0; j<n; j++)
{
for (k=0; k<n; k++)
{
Array[i][j][k]=i*j+k;
}
}
}
//Check array is initialized correctly.
printf("%d\n", Array[4][5][6]);
//Pass array to Function.
Function(Array);
//Check that Function has correctly changed the element.
printf("%d\n", Array[4][5][6]);
return 0;
}
void Function(int ***Array)
{
//Check that Function can access values correctly.
printf("%d\n", Array[4][5][6]);
//Change an element.
Array[4][5][6]=1000;
}
I know this is not specific to your matrix multiplication, but it should demonstrate how to pass the array to the function. It is quite likely that your function would need to know the dimensions of the array, so pass those to it as well... void Function(int ***Array, int n) and call the function as Function(Array, n);