1 files changed, 57 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/open_issues/exec_leak.mdwn b/open_issues/exec_leak.mdwn
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..b58d2c81
--- /dev/null
+++ b/open_issues/exec_leak.mdwn
@@ -0,0 +1,57 @@
+[[!meta copyright="Copyright © 2012 Free Software Foundation, Inc."]]
+
+[[!meta license="""[[!toggle id="license" text="GFDL 1.2+"]][[!toggleable
+id="license" text="Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this
+document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or
+any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant
+Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts.  A copy of the license
+is included in the section entitled [[GNU Free Documentation
+License|/fdl]]."]]"""]]
+
+[[!tag open_issue_hurd]]
+
+
+# IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-08-11
+
+    <braunr> the exec servers seems to leak a lot
+    <braunr> server*
+    <braunr> exec now uses 109M on darnassus
+    <braunr> it really leaks a lot
+    <pinotree> only 109mb? few months ago, exec on exodar was taking more than
+      200mb after few days of uptime with builds done
+    <braunr> i wonder how much it takes on the buildds
+
+
+# IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-08-17
+
+    <braunr> the exec leak is tricky
+    <braunr> bddebian: btw, look at the TODO file in the hurd source code
+    <braunr> bddebian: there is a not from thomas bushnell about that
+    <braunr> "*** Handle dead name notifications on execserver ports. !
+    <braunr> not sure it's still a todo item, but it might be worth checking
+    <bddebian> braunr: diskfs_execboot_class = ports_create_class (0, 0);
+      This is what would need to change right?  It should call some cleanup
+      routine in the first argument?
+    <bddebian> Would be ideal if it could just use deadboot() from exec.
+    <braunr> bddebian: possible
+    <braunr> bddebian: hum execboot, i'm not so sure
+    <bddebian> Execboot is the exec task, no?
+    <braunr> i don't know what execboot is
+    <bddebian> It's from libdiskfs
+    <braunr> but "diskfs_execboot_class" looks like a class of ports used at
+      startup only
+    <braunr> ah
+    <braunr> then it's something run in the diskfs users ?
+    <bddebian> yes
+    <braunr> the leak is in exec
+    <braunr> if clients misbehave, it shouldn't affect that server
+    <bddebian> That's a different issue, this was about the TODO thing 
+    <braunr> ah
+    <braunr> i don't know
+    <bddebian> Me either :)
+    <bddebian> For the leak I'm still focusing on do-bunzip2 but I am baffled
+      at my results..
+    <braunr> ?
+    <bddebian> Where my counters are zero if I always increment on different
+      vars but wild freaking numbers if I increment on malloc and decrement on
+      free