On 08/13/2012 01:57 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Sat, Aug 11, 2012 at 07:45:19AM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=847429 >> >> Spotted by valgrind: >> >> ==2390== 45 bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 68 of 123 >> ==2390== by 0x5817568: virInitialize (libvirt.c:450) >> ==2390== by 0x5492C02: init_libguestfs (guestfs.c:108) >> >> libvirt-0.10.0-0rc0.fc18.x86_64 >> >> libguestfs calls virInitialize, but (since there is no cleanup >> function) doesn't do any corresponding cleanup. Is that correct? > > Yep, virInitialize does global one-time initialization and we don't > provide any de-initialization function, so any memory allocations > should be considered global state. You'll want to provide a valgrind > suppressions file which whitelists any stack trace below the > virInitialize function. Should libvirt be providing a suppression file as part of the installation to make it easier for others to ignore known one-shot initializations? -- Eric Blake eblake@xxxxxxxxxx +1-919-301-3266 Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list