-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 225
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Recorder Memory leak: Investigate valgrind output #1019
Comments
@hoffie I think you're right. I've just had a quick look, and noticed the following items:
EDIT: actually, But I see you self-assigned this, so I don't want to duplicate work you are already doing. But happy to assist if required! |
@softins Thanks for analyzing this further! Feel free to assign to you if you want, I can only start working on that again on Saturday/Sunday I guess. Just wanted to assign this to someone to avoid adding to the pool of unassigned issues. :) |
Ok, that's cool. I have some time today, so I'll carry on looking at it. Really appreciate the valgrind output you posted! |
Just give me a message if you want me to test something. |
Well this is looking promising:
This is on a headless build. |
Although the recorder leaks appear to have been found, it appears there are others. I'm particularly suspicious of the OnTimer calls in your valgrind output. More investigation needed! |
Very cool :)
Have opened #1083 with fresh valgrind output to avoid getting lost in details. I suggest that we close this issue (#1019) once the PR is merged. |
Describe the bug
valgrind
shows that memory is leaked. It might be related to the jam recorder.This is an attempt to reproduce the real-world memleaks as observed by @genesisproject2020 (~1GB RAM within ~25 hours) in #923 (comment)
valgrind ran ~10 minutes and the server had 7 clients connected (all sending silence).
To Reproduce
Expected behavior
No leak.
Operating system
Arch Linux, Linux wuechoo 5.10.9-arch1-1 #1 SMP PREEMPT Tue, 19 Jan 2021 22:06:06 +0000 x86_64 GNU/Linux
Version of Jamulus
3.6.2dev-83d5f0cf
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: