From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 16 11:19:15 2004 Return-Path: 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 007AB16A4CE; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 11:19:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.mdacc.tmc.edu (mail.mdanderson.org [143.111.251.38]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 978EA43D45; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 11:19:13 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jonathan@fosburgh.org) Received: from ([143.111.64.231]) by mail.mdacc.tmc.edu (InterScan E-Mail VirusWall Unix); Fri, 16 Jan 2004 13:18:35 -0600 (CST) From: Jonathan Fosburgh To: Eric Anholt Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 13:11:33 -0600 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.94 References: <200401160820.19794.jonathan@fosburgh.org> <1074277065.725.4.camel@leguin> In-Reply-To: <1074277065.725.4.camel@leguin> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <200401161311.37284.jonathan@fosburgh.org> cc: freebsd-x11@freebsd.org cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Possible memory leak in XFree86 X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 19:19:15 -0000 =2D----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Friday 16 January 2004 12:17 pm, Eric Anholt wrote: > > Every month or so I see someone saying they think XFree86 is leaking > memory. Of course, with this release of XFree86 having been out for > about a year now, there are probably no major memory leaks, especially > with such a commonly used driver like ATI. > > The X Server allocates memory on behalf of clients. What you are > seeing, I'm willing to bet, is some application you run is leaking > pixmaps, so the X Server continues allocating memory for it until OOM > killer starts killing things off. You could try, when the memory usage > is very large, killing your apps off one by one and seeing when the > memory usage in the server goes back down. I will admit that part of why I hadn't previously reported it (in addition = to=20 thinking that my prior hardware had something to do with it) was that I wou= ld=20 have expected seeing people screaming about this if it really was a problem= =20 in X itself (or at least running on FBSD(-CURRENT). Weighing against that,= =20 however, is the fact that I do not see this at home running the same=20 software, the same configuration (I configure KDE the same way, etc) and=20 basically the same apps. However, I will see if I can start with disabling= =20 kscreensaver entirely (that may or may not work for me, since I think the=20 screensaver has to be active to lock the display) and see if that helps ove= r=20 the long weekend. =2D --=20 Jonathan Fosburgh AIX and Storage Administrator UT MD Anderson Cancer Center Houston, TX =2D----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFACDdoqUvQmqp7omYRAqgkAJ9Ow8JVHAqI/hLKFssp/Gl9U8agfACfYKm0 Eg5NuLkIPp3HF4cEI0RKosU=3D =3DGyb+ =2D----END PGP SIGNATURE-----