On Sat, Apr 02, 2011 at 11:08:31AM +0200, Lars Heidieker wrote: > On 04/01/11 17:20, Manuel Bouyer wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 01, 2011 at 10:43:50AM -0400, Allen Briggs wrote: > >> On Fri, Apr 01, 2011 at 08:35:52AM +0200, Lars Heidieker wrote: > >>> this is a part of the changes to the kernel memory management. > >>> It's a changing the subr_extent to use kmem(9) instead of malloc(9) > >>> essentially removing the MALLOC_TYPE from it. > >> Are there tools for figuring out where memory might be leaking? > >> The MALLOC_TYPE is not ideal for that but can be at least provide > >> some clue. > > Seconded. It has proven to be very helpfull at times > > > > Yes, I can see the point here but with large parts of memory allocation > being moved to kmem any way the point doesn't seem to be very strong to me.
Why ? A leak is still a leak > But tracing who is doing the allocation is definitely something worse > having, tracing this with dtrace should be possible as Andrew pointed > out end january, when I made the patch public. AFAIK dtrace doesn't work on non-modular kernels ... -- Manuel Bouyer <[email protected]> NetBSD: 26 ans d'experience feront toujours la difference --
