On Wed, 19 Nov 2014, Peter Maydell wrote:
Not for 2.2,
Fair enough.
and I'm still not really convinced in
general that it's worthwhile at all.
I'm surprised that this small patch caused so much controversy. It seems
very simple and straightforward to me.
This patch fixes a memory leak.
On 20 November 2014 11:53, Kirill Batuzov batuz...@ispras.ru wrote:
I'm surprised that this small patch caused so much controversy. It seems
very simple and straightforward to me.
This patch fixes a memory leak. The fact that it indeed was a memory
leak is indicated by Valgrind output
On 20 November 2014 11:53, Kirill Batuzov batuz...@ispras.ru wrote:
I'm surprised that this small patch caused so much controversy. It seems
very simple and straightforward to me.
This patch fixes a memory leak. The fact that it indeed was a memory
leak is indicated by Valgrind output
Nikita Belov zod...@ispras.ru writes:
Variable 'ram_lo' is allocated unconditionally, but used only in some cases.
When it is unused pointer will be lost at function exit, resulting in a
memory leak. Free memory in this case.
Valgrind output:
==16879== 240 bytes in 1 blocks are definitely
On 2014-10-29 17:03, Nikita Belov wrote:
Variable 'ram_lo' is allocated unconditionally, but used only in some
cases.
When it is unused pointer will be lost at function exit, resulting in
a
memory leak. Free memory in this case.
Valgrind output:
==16879== 240 bytes in 1 blocks are definitely
On 19 November 2014 15:05, Nikita Belov zod...@ispras.ru wrote:
ping
Not for 2.2, and I'm still not really convinced in
general that it's worthwhile at all.
thanks
-- PMM
On 31 October 2014 10:42, Nikita Belov zod...@ispras.ru wrote:
On 2014-10-29 19:03, Peter Maydell wrote:
We leak all of the MemoryRegions we allocate here, because we
don't have a persistent state struct to keep them in. This
doesn't really matter much because they're generally needed
for the
On 2014-10-29 19:03, Peter Maydell wrote:
On 29 October 2014 14:03, Nikita Belov zod...@ispras.ru wrote:
Variable 'ram_lo' is allocated unconditionally, but used only in some
cases.
When it is unused pointer will be lost at function exit, resulting in
a
memory leak. Free memory in this case.
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014, Peter Maydell wrote:
On 31 October 2014 10:42, Nikita Belov zod...@ispras.ru wrote:
On 2014-10-29 19:03, Peter Maydell wrote:
We leak all of the MemoryRegions we allocate here, because we
don't have a persistent state struct to keep them in. This
doesn't really
On 29 October 2014 14:03, Nikita Belov zod...@ispras.ru wrote:
Variable 'ram_lo' is allocated unconditionally, but used only in some cases.
When it is unused pointer will be lost at function exit, resulting in a
memory leak. Free memory in this case.
Valgrind output:
==16879== 240 bytes in 1
Variable 'ram_lo' is allocated unconditionally, but used only in some cases.
When it is unused pointer will be lost at function exit, resulting in a
memory leak. Free memory in this case.
Valgrind output:
==16879== 240 bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 6,033 of
7,018
==16879==
11 matches
Mail list logo
