The branch passes our short regression (the longer test is running) with the same memory leaks:
per: https://lists.quagga.net/pipermail/quagga-dev/2016-July/015982.html #1 Author: Pradosh Mohapatra <pmohapat at cumulusnetworks.com <https://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-dev>> Date: Mon Nov 9 20:21:41 2015 -0500 bgpd, doc, lib, zebra: nexthop-tracking in zebra 0. Introduction This is the design specification for next hop tracking feature in Quagga. ... Leaked type: BGP route : 40 blocks Leaked type: BGP extra attributes : 40 blocks #2 Author: Dinesh Dutt <ddutt at cumulusnetworks.com <https://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-dev>> Date: Tue May 19 17:47:21 2015 -0700 bgpd, zebra: Use next hop tracking for connected routes too Allow next hop tracking to work with connected routes And cleanup obsolete code in bgp_scan and bgp_import. .... Leaked type: BGP nexthop : 7 blocks Lou On 7/20/2016 5:34 PM, Paul Jakma wrote: > Hi, > > I've shuffled in Donald's fix, and did the shuffling for Lou's testing. > Published the rebased head to: > > volatile/patch-tracking/8/proposed/ff-2016072001 > > Hopefully there's no further probs with it and we can bump master along > to that head soon, and crank through the next batch. > > regards, _______________________________________________ Quagga-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-dev
