The file is identical in both the released tarball and in the source 
code repository (at the tag 4.6.0). This bug seems to have been fixed in 
changeset 6559:e840bacdf25a (ticket [#1373]), which has not yet been 
included in any release.

/ Anders Widell

On 08/07/2015 09:45 PM, Alex Jones wrote:
> Guys,
>
>     I'm seeing a huge leak in cpnd.  There is something very strange 
> with the released software, though.  Here is the leak from the 
> released tar file (official 4.5.1.tar.gz and 4.6.0.tar.gz both have 
> this):
>
> cpnd_proc.c:272
> send_evt.info.cpa.info.arr_msg.ckpt_data = NULL;
>
>     This overwrites the data pointer, so any allocations made are leaked.
>
>     But this line does not exist in Mercurial at all!  How is it 
> getting into the released tar file?
>
> Alex
>
> ==29759== 61,122,000 bytes in 30,561 blocks are definitely lost in 
> loss record 140 of 140
> ==29759==    at 0x4C2ABED: malloc (in 
> /usr/lib64/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
> ==29759==    by 0x41DEA7: cpsv_ckpt_node_decode (cpsv_evt.c:709)
> ==29759==    by 0x41DFDE: cpsv_ckpt_data_decode (cpsv_evt.c:650)
> ==29759==    by 0x40EC63: cpsv_ckpt_access_decode (cpnd_mds.c:410)
> ==29759==    by 0x410253: cpnd_mds_callback (cpnd_mds.c:503)
> ==29759==    by 0x4E7469F: mds_mcm_do_decode_full_or_flat.isra.8 
> (mds_c_sndrcv.c:4940)
> ==29759==    by 0x4E74C3D: mds_mcm_process_recv_snd_msg_common.part.9 
> (mds_c_sndrcv.c:4283)
> ==29759==    by 0x4E771A2: mds_mcm_ll_data_rcv (mds_c_sndrcv.c:4487)
> ==29759==    by 0x4E6C584: mdtm_process_recv_message_common 
> (mds_dt_common.c:483)
> ==29759==    by 0x4E6C8FB: mdtm_process_recv_data (mds_dt_common.c:901)
> ==29759==    by 0x4E86874: mdtm_process_recv_events (mds_dt_tipc.c:784)
> ==29759==    by 0x54BEE0D: start_thread (pthread_create.c:305)
>


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Opensaf-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel

Reply via email to