From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ted Zlatanov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: gnutls memory leak [Was: Re: Emacs bzr memory footprint] Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2011 18:01:47 -0400 Organization: =?utf-8?B?0KLQtdC+0LTQvtGAINCX0LvQsNGC0LDQvdC+0LI=?= @ Cienfuegos Message-ID: <87sjmeayb8.fsf@lifelogs.com> References: <83fwix2osa.fsf@gnu.org> <0B3EE7A4-D0D6-4D1E-ADC4-0BEE68F179B2@mit.edu> <87fwivwp37.fsf@turtle.gmx.de> <87sjmvpmd2.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87aa93wmc4.fsf@turtle.gmx.de> <87sjmnrdjw.fsf@spindle.srvr.nix> <87ty73mc0m.fsf@spindle.srvr.nix> <87mxcp2cv0.fsf@spindle.srvr.nix> <87k47rx0t6.fsf_-_@gnu.org> <87lis79d7l.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1319752934 14370 80.91.229.12 (27 Oct 2011 22:02:14 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2011 22:02:14 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Oct 28 00:02:08 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RJY1W-0008Hi-90 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 28 Oct 2011 00:02:06 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:51192 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RJY1V-0008EU-LN for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 27 Oct 2011 18:02:05 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:48333) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RJY1S-0008Dw-Ul for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 27 Oct 2011 18:02:04 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RJY1R-0003DO-Um for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 27 Oct 2011 18:02:02 -0400 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:60193) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RJY1R-0003DI-Ow for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 27 Oct 2011 18:02:01 -0400 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RJY1P-0008GI-Tl for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Oct 2011 00:01:59 +0200 Original-Received: from c-76-28-40-19.hsd1.vt.comcast.net ([76.28.40.19]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2011 00:01:59 +0200 Original-Received: from tzz by c-76-28-40-19.hsd1.vt.comcast.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2011 00:01:59 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Mail-Followup-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-Lines: 16 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: c-76-28-40-19.hsd1.vt.comcast.net X-Face: bd.DQ~'29fIs`T_%O%C\g%6jW)yi[zuz6; d4V0`@y-~$#3P_Ng{@m+e4o<4P'#(_GJQ%TT= D}[Ep*b!\e,fBZ'j_+#"Ps?s2!4H2-Y"sx" Mail-Copies-To: never User-Agent: Gnus/5.110018 (No Gnus v0.18) Emacs/24.0.90 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:LfH8FHP/UPlozsuCrmus9rWqiZ4= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 80.91.229.12 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:145681 Archived-At: On Thu, 27 Oct 2011 14:10:38 +0800 Chong Yidong wrote: CY> Since no one responded so far, I went ahead and committed a fix for that CY> particular memory leak. I verified that with this fix, the credentials CY> structures are deallocated after sending a mail via SSL; previously they CY> won't. CY> If someone could check whether the memory leak is gone or still CY> persists, that would be great. Thanks, I wasn't able to respond in time. But I doubt the credentials are the problem. They don't get allocated/deallocated all that often, unless I've misunderstood something fundamental in the GnuTLS code. I suspect the error logging and general packet handling code. Ted