[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: storage_sink_open is leaky
From: |
John Darrington |
Subject: |
Re: storage_sink_open is leaky |
Date: |
Mon, 24 Jan 2005 22:08:23 +0800 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.4i |
On Sun, Jan 23, 2005 at 11:06:18PM -0800, Ben Pfaff wrote:
Okay, I updated to the latest CVS and with
make check SUPERVISOR='valgrind --leak-check=yes'
I only see one leak:
==3402== 36 bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 2
of 4
==3402== at 0x1B904EDD: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:131)
==3402== by 0x8073DC6: xmalloc (alloc.c:39)
==3402== by 0x80888FB: dfm_open_writer (dfm-write.c:52)
==3402== by 0x80B3C98: internal_cmd_print (print.c:190)
==3402== by 0x80B3AD1: cmd_print (print.c:114)
==3402== by 0x807A706: cmd_parse (command.c:207)
==3402== by 0x80A2ECB: execute_command (main.c:134)
==3402== by 0x80A2E7C: parse_script (main.c:104)
==3402== by 0x80A2E18: main (main.c:91)
This one is simple, so I have checked in a fix.
Thanks.
Are you using --show-reachable=yes on the valgrind command line?
Those are not really leaks, because that data is still reachable
at program exit, and so I don't think they are really worth
"fixing".
I see your point, but I can't totally agree. There may be cases where
our test examples result in the memory being "still reachable", but a
more complex example it would be "definitely lost".
For example, if a particular command forgets to clean up, then a test
script which calls that command just once, will give a "still
reachable", but if that command was called many times in a complex
script, it'd be a definite leak.
By the way, every test I run reports this error:
==3122== Invalid free() / delete / delete[]
==3122== at 0x1B905460: free (vg_replace_malloc.c:153)
==3122== by 0x80696DB: done_settings (set.q:1059)
==3122== by 0x809B609: done_glob (glob.c:190)
==3122== by 0x808B540: err_hcf (error.c:231)
==3122== by 0x80A2EF9: execute_command (main.c:129)
==3122== by 0x80A2E7C: parse_script (main.c:104)
==3122== by 0x80A2E18: main (main.c:91)
==3122== Address 0x52BFEDD4 is on thread 1's stack
I think this must be something you introduced in the latest
check-in.
Hmm. I can't produce this problem. Did you compile/configure with any
non-default options ??
John
--
PGP Public key ID: 1024D/2DE827B3
fingerprint = 8797 A26D 0854 2EAB 0285 A290 8A67 719C 2DE8 27B3
See http://wwwkeys.pgp.net or any PGP keyserver for public key.
pgpE1KHDXCyKU.pgp
Description: PGP signature