On 2007-01-14, at 11:15:33 +0100, Rafael Garcia-Suarez wrote:
> On 13/01/07, Marvin Humphrey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > It's been a couple days with no response to this, so it looks like
> > I've been Warnocked. Not too surprising, as this very small memory
> > leak affects very few people:
On 13/01/07, Marvin Humphrey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It's been a couple days with no response to this, so it looks like
I've been Warnocked. Not too surprising, as this very small memory
leak affects very few people: people using Valgrind to debug XS
modules, possibly people embedding Perl.
On Jan 10, 2007, at 2:45 PM, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
However, before I do that, I'd like to know whether
DL_UNLOAD_ALL_AT_EXIT should be defined more often. Should
DEBUGGING turn it on? If so then there's no need to patch
perlhack. Or should it be on all the time? IIUC, not cleaning up
On Jan 8, 2007, at 12:42 PM, Nicholas Clark wrote:
On Mon, Jan 08, 2007 at 12:23:09PM -0800, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
Unfortunately, I've never succeeded in banishing all of Perl's leaks
when debugging XS under either 5.8.8 or 5.9.4. Now that we're having
this discussion, I will attempt to wri
On Jan 8, 2007, at 1:14 PM, Dan Sully wrote:
==30258== 436 (112 direct, 324 indirect) bytes in 1 blocks are
definitely lost in loss record 11 of 16
==30258==at 0x4A2080E: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:149)
==30258==by 0x56CC911: CRYPTO_malloc (in /usr/lib/libcrypto.so.
0.9.8)
==30258=
On Jan 8, 2007, at 12:42 PM, Nicholas Clark wrote:
On Mon, Jan 08, 2007 at 12:23:09PM -0800, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
Unfortunately, I've never succeeded in banishing all of Perl's leaks
when debugging XS under either 5.8.8 or 5.9.4. Now that we're having
this discussion, I will attempt to wri
On Jan 8, 2007, at 1:14 PM, Dan Sully wrote:
==30258== 436 (112 direct, 324 indirect) bytes in 1 blocks are
definitely lost in loss record 11 of 16
==30258==at 0x4A2080E: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:149)
==30258==by 0x56CC911: CRYPTO_malloc (in /usr/lib/libcrypto.so.
0.9.8)
==30258=
* Marvin Humphrey shaped the electrons to say...
The one thing that looks weird is this, in sv_bio_final():
if (!sv) {
sv = &PL_sv_undef;
}
That was just in the for debugging, I commented it out and still have the
leak behavior. valgrind reports this:
==30258=
On Mon, Jan 08, 2007 at 12:23:09PM -0800, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
> Unfortunately, I've never succeeded in banishing all of Perl's leaks
> when debugging XS under either 5.8.8 or 5.9.4. Now that we're having
> this discussion, I will attempt to write up a test case illustrating
> the problem
On Jan 8, 2007, at 11:30 AM, Dan Sully wrote:
* Marvin Humphrey shaped the electrons to say...
I think you'll need to look elsewhere. Coincidentally, I'm
debugging memory leaks right this moment using valgrind. If you
have access to a Linux system, I'd strongly recommend you give it
* Marvin Humphrey shaped the electrons to say...
I think you'll need to look elsewhere. Coincidentally, I'm debugging
memory leaks right this moment using valgrind. If you have access to
a Linux system, I'd strongly recommend you give it a try.
Any suggestions for using valgrind with Perl
Your handling of the perl array looks correct. You create a new AV with
a refcount of one. You add a bunch of scalars to the array, each of
which is created with a refcount of 1. Crucially, you handle the
arrayref correctly, creating a single reference which does not increase
the refcount of
On Jan 8, 2007, at 10:16 AM, Alberto Simões wrote:
array = newAV();
av_push(array, newSVuv(dictionary_get_occ(D, wid)));
for (j = 0; j < MAXENTRY; j++) {
twid = 0;
prob = 0.0;
twid = dictionary_get_id(D, wid, j);
if (twid) {
Marvin Humphrey wrote:
On Jan 8, 2007, at 10:26 AM, Nicholas Clark wrote:
Am I doing something wrong? Maybe because of refcounts and such?
Yes, I think so. (But I'm not the expert on these)
>8 snip 8<
RETVAL = sv_2mortal(newRV_noinc((SV*)array));
/me .oO( wow, how often do
On Mon, Jan 08, 2007 at 10:39:57AM -0800, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
>
> On Jan 8, 2007, at 10:26 AM, Nicholas Clark wrote:
>
> >>Am I doing something wrong? Maybe because of refcounts and such?
> >
> >Yes, I think so. (But I'm not the expert on these)
>
> >8 snip 8<
>
> > RETVAL = sv_2
On Jan 8, 2007, at 10:26 AM, Nicholas Clark wrote:
Am I doing something wrong? Maybe because of refcounts and such?
Yes, I think so. (But I'm not the expert on these)
>8 snip 8<
RETVAL = sv_2mortal(newRV_noinc((SV*)array));
/me .oO( wow, how often do you get to correct D
On Mon, Jan 08, 2007 at 06:16:57PM +, Alberto Simões wrote:
> Hi
>
> I am trying to debug some code that is using too much memory. I am not
> sure if it is from the XS code, but if you say it isn't at least I know
> I should look elsewhere.
>
> Here it is (resumed):
>
>array = newAV();
17 matches
Mail list logo
