Neal Norwitz wrote: > There are still 2 memory leaks while running the regression tests. > They show up when running test_fork1 and test_pty. There may be more, > valgrind crashed on me the last run which was also before I fixed some > of the reference leaks. It would be great if people could localize > the leaks.
Can somebody please give a quick explanation how valgrind can give *any* reasonable leak analysis when obmalloc is used? In the current implementation, obmalloc never ever calls free(3), so all pool memory should appear to have leaked. So if valgrind does *not* report all memory as leaked: how does it find out? > 512 bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 319 of 548 > at 0x11B1AF13: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:149) > by 0x433CC4: new_arena (obmalloc.c:500) See http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2004-June/045253.html This is the resizing of the list of arenas, which is a deliberate leak. It just happened to be exhausted in this particular call stack. > 1280 bytes in 2 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 383 of 548 > at 0x11B1AF13: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:149) > by 0x433CC4: new_arena (obmalloc.c:500) Likewise. Regards, Martin _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com