On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 09:53:22AM -0600, Eric Blake wrote: > 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? Is there a way for individual libraries to register global suppression files with valgrind ? If so, then I think it'd be reasonable for us to supply one. Otherwise, we could at least stuff one in the docs directory Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :| -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list