Would that be something like this? Although it didn't fix the leak, which was the entire point of this exercise.
Maybe because driver::finalize () is not getting called so the call to mdswitches.release () doesn't really happen, which was the reason I went with std::vector in the first place because it takes care of itself. On Wed, 6 Dec 2023 at 14:39, Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com> wrote: > On Wed, Dec 06, 2023 at 02:29:25PM +0000, Costas Argyris wrote: > > Attached a new patch with these changes. > > > > On Mon, 4 Dec 2023 at 12:15, Jonathan Wakely <jwak...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > On Sat, 2 Dec 2023 at 21:24, Costas Argyris wrote: > > > > > > > > Use std::vector instead of malloc'd pointer > > > > to get automatic freeing of memory. > > > > > > You can't include <vector> there. Instead you need to define > > > INCLUDE_VECTOR before "system.h" > > > > > > Shouldn't you be using resize, not reserve? Otherwise mdswitches[i] is > > > undefined. > > Any reason not to use vec.h instead? > I especially don't like the fact that with a global > std::vector<whatever> var; > it means runtime __cxa_atexit for the var the destruction, which it really > doesn't need on exit. > > We really don't need to free the memory at exit time, that is just wasted > cycles, all we need is that it is freed before the pointer or vector is > cleared. > > Jakub > >
0001-driver-Fix-memory-leak.patch
Description: Binary data
