From eccdd13dd3c812b8f0b3d046ef9d8738df00562a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Thomas Schwinge Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2013 21:45:38 +0200 Subject: IRC. --- open_issues/exec_leak.mdwn | 57 ---------------------------------------------- 1 file changed, 57 deletions(-) delete mode 100644 open_issues/exec_leak.mdwn (limited to 'open_issues/exec_leak.mdwn') diff --git a/open_issues/exec_leak.mdwn b/open_issues/exec_leak.mdwn deleted file mode 100644 index b58d2c81..00000000 --- a/open_issues/exec_leak.mdwn +++ /dev/null @@ -1,57 +0,0 @@ -[[!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 - - the exec servers seems to leak a lot - server* - exec now uses 109M on darnassus - it really leaks a lot - only 109mb? few months ago, exec on exodar was taking more than - 200mb after few days of uptime with builds done - i wonder how much it takes on the buildds - - -# IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-08-17 - - the exec leak is tricky - bddebian: btw, look at the TODO file in the hurd source code - bddebian: there is a not from thomas bushnell about that - "*** Handle dead name notifications on execserver ports. ! - not sure it's still a todo item, but it might be worth checking - 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? - Would be ideal if it could just use deadboot() from exec. - bddebian: possible - bddebian: hum execboot, i'm not so sure - Execboot is the exec task, no? - i don't know what execboot is - It's from libdiskfs - but "diskfs_execboot_class" looks like a class of ports used at - startup only - ah - then it's something run in the diskfs users ? - yes - the leak is in exec - if clients misbehave, it shouldn't affect that server - That's a different issue, this was about the TODO thing - ah - i don't know - Me either :) - For the leak I'm still focusing on do-bunzip2 but I am baffled - at my results.. - ? - 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 -- cgit v1.2.3