Hi Rhys, I ran the example we discussed using C with valgrind and indeed found no leaks. Then I wrote the same thing in Cython and ran the valgrind again with --suppressions=/usr/.../python.supp as suggested here, http://kratos-wiki.cimne.upc.edu/index.php/Checking_memory_use_with_Valgrind. And the difference looks like this:
HEAP SUMMARY: ==7329== in use at exit: 1,013,593 bytes in 245 blocks ==7329== total heap usage: 7,559 allocs, 7,314 frees, 6,631,527 bytes allocated ==7329== LEAK SUMMARY: ==7329== definitely lost: 0 bytes in 0 blocks ==7329== indirectly lost: 0 bytes in 0 blocks ==7329== possibly lost: 6,072 bytes in 17 blocks ==7329== still reachable: 1,007,521 bytes in 228 blocks ==7329== suppressed: 0 bytes in 0 blocks Does it mean that the problem I am experiencing is because of those 245 blocks, which were not deallocated? Could you give me a hint on how to fight with the 'still reachable' and 'possibly lost' blocks? I guess you have some experience with that. Best, Alex On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 5:27 PM, Rhys Ulerich <rhys.uler...@gmail.com>wrote: > > May I write you back when I get more results from valgrind? > > Of course. Please be sure to CC the list, however, and as Patrick > suggested please try GSL 1.16. > > - Rhys >