Re: [PATCH hail] chunkd: don't leak an FS object iterator

2010-10-03 Thread Jim Meyering
Jeff Garzik wrote: > On 09/29/2010 11:20 AM, Jim Meyering wrote: >> >> chk_list_objs called fs_list_objs_open without also calling >> fs_list_objs_close. >> >> 32,808 bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 413 of 419 >> at 0x4A0515D: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:195) >> by

Re: [PATCH hail] chunkd: don't leak an FS object iterator

2010-09-30 Thread Jeff Garzik
On 09/29/2010 11:20 AM, Jim Meyering wrote: chk_list_objs called fs_list_objs_open without also calling fs_list_objs_close. 32,808 bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 413 of 419 at 0x4A0515D: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:195) by 0x31BA8A26D0: __alloc_dir (opendir.c:1

Re: [PATCH hail] chunkd: don't leak an FS object iterator

2010-09-30 Thread Jeff Garzik
On 09/29/2010 11:20 AM, Jim Meyering wrote: chk_list_objs called fs_list_objs_open without also calling fs_list_objs_close. 32,808 bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 413 of 419 at 0x4A0515D: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:195) by 0x31BA8A26D0: __alloc_dir (opendir.c:1

[PATCH hail] chunkd: don't leak an FS object iterator

2010-09-29 Thread Jim Meyering
chk_list_objs called fs_list_objs_open without also calling fs_list_objs_close. 32,808 bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 413 of 419 at 0x4A0515D: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:195) by 0x31BA8A26D0: __alloc_dir (opendir.c:184) by 0x405619: fs_list_objs_open (be-fs.c:9