From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Sat Aug  2 04:23:38 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 271BE37B401
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>;
	Sat,  2 Aug 2003 04:23:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [212.242.86.163])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FA3E43FA3
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>;
	Sat,  2 Aug 2003 04:23:37 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from phk@phk.freebsd.dk)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by critter.freebsd.dk (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h72BNLbS009869;
	Sat, 2 Aug 2003 13:23:34 +0200 (CEST)
	(envelope-from phk@phk.freebsd.dk)
To: "Ryan T. Dean" <rtdean@cytherianage.net>
From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 02 Aug 2003 07:11:21 EDT."
             <3F2B9C59.3060209@cytherianage.net> 
Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2003 13:23:21 +0200
Message-ID: <9868.1059823401@critter.freebsd.dk>
cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: vfprintf() has a 4096-byte memory leak? 
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2003 11:23:38 -0000

In message <3F2B9C59.3060209@cytherianage.net>, "Ryan T. Dean" writes:
>Hey all-
>    I was doing some app debugging tonight, and noticed what appears to 
>be a memory leak in vfprintf().

This is probably the buffer which stdio uses for all I/O.

Try calling 
	setbuf(stdout, NULL);
	setbuf(stderr, NULL);

as the very first thing in your program, and you will probably see
that it does not allocate the 4k buffer, you may also be able to
measure the performance change due to this.

In other words, what you see is perfectly normal, and to be expected,
but if it is a problem for you, the above is the workaround.


	

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.