On 27.08.24 20:41, Peter Xu wrote:
On Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 08:00:07PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
On 27.08.24 19:57, Peter Xu wrote:
On Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 10:37:15AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
/* Called with ram_list.mutex held */
-static void dirty_memory_extend(ram_addr_t old_r
On Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 08:00:07PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 27.08.24 19:57, Peter Xu wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 10:37:15AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> > > /* Called with ram_list.mutex held */
> > > -static void dirty_memory_extend(ram_addr_t old_ram_size,
> > > -
On 27.08.24 19:57, Peter Xu wrote:
On Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 10:37:15AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
/* Called with ram_list.mutex held */
-static void dirty_memory_extend(ram_addr_t old_ram_size,
-ram_addr_t new_ram_size)
+static void dirty_memory_extend(ram_a
On 27.08.24 19:50, Peter Xu wrote:
On Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 01:28:02PM -0400, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 at 13:24, David Hildenbrand wrote:
On 27.08.24 18:52, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 at 04:38, David Hildenbrand wrote:
As reported by Peter, we might be lea
On Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 10:37:15AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> /* Called with ram_list.mutex held */
> -static void dirty_memory_extend(ram_addr_t old_ram_size,
> -ram_addr_t new_ram_size)
> +static void dirty_memory_extend(ram_addr_t new_ram_size)
> {
> -
On Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 01:28:02PM -0400, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 at 13:24, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> >
> > On 27.08.24 18:52, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> > > On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 at 04:38, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> > >>
> > >> As reported by Peter, we might be leaking memory w
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 at 13:24, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>
> On 27.08.24 18:52, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> > On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 at 04:38, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> >>
> >> As reported by Peter, we might be leaking memory when removing the
> >> highest RAMBlock (in the weird ram_addr_t space), and a
On 27.08.24 18:52, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 at 04:38, David Hildenbrand wrote:
As reported by Peter, we might be leaking memory when removing the
highest RAMBlock (in the weird ram_addr_t space), and adding a new one.
We will fail to realize that we already allocated bitmaps
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 at 04:38, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>
> As reported by Peter, we might be leaking memory when removing the
> highest RAMBlock (in the weird ram_addr_t space), and adding a new one.
>
> We will fail to realize that we already allocated bitmaps for more
> dirty memory blocks, and
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 at 09:37, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>
> As reported by Peter, we might be leaking memory when removing the
> highest RAMBlock (in the weird ram_addr_t space), and adding a new one.
>
> We will fail to realize that we already allocated bitmaps for more
> dirty memory blocks, and
As reported by Peter, we might be leaking memory when removing the
highest RAMBlock (in the weird ram_addr_t space), and adding a new one.
We will fail to realize that we already allocated bitmaps for more
dirty memory blocks, and effectively discard the pointers to them.
Fix it by getting rid of
11 matches
Mail list logo
