Date: Sun, 27 Jul 2003 22:46:46 -0700 From: John-Mark Gurney <gurney_j@efn.org> To: Scott Long <scottl@freebsd.org> Cc: Mark Blackman <mark@exonetric.com> Subject: Re: device driver memory leak in 5.1-20030726? Message-ID: <20030728054646.GR10708@funkthat.com> In-Reply-To: <3F24B5C6.4010403@freebsd.org> References: <C882BF18-C03F-11D7-A23D-00039315D3FE@exonetric.com> <20030727163914.S698@korben.in.tern> <20030727191758.GN10708@funkthat.com> <3F24B5C6.4010403@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Scott Long wrote this message on Sun, Jul 27, 2003 at 23:33 -0600:
> John-Mark Gurney wrote:
>
> >It may be leaking, but it won't be leaking devbuf memory. The only
> >thing that is in usb (in dev/usb) that uses M_DEVBUF is ukbd.
>
> bus_dma_tag_create() allocates out of M_DEVBUF. Could it be that tags
> are being created and never destroyed?
Ugh, yes, it does. :( What is the point of having malloc areas if
everything uses them? I just checked and about every driver allocates
memory under DEVBUF. Is there some reason why we don't allocate more
malloc types to make this type of thing more easy to debug?
--
John-Mark Gurney Voice: +1 415 225 5579
"All that I will do, has been done, All that I have, has not."
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030728054646.GR10708>