Mir

Comment 5 for bug 1628794

Daniel van Vugt (vanvugt) wrote :

And again:

07:43:24 11: ==21085== 192 (64 direct, 128 indirect) bytes in 2 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 24 of 36
07:43:24 11: ==21085== at 0x4C2E0EF: operator new(unsigned long) (in /usr/lib/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
07:43:24 11: ==21085== by 0x41269F2: google::protobuf::Closure* google::protobuf::NewCallback<mir::protobuf::Void*>(void (*)(mir::protobuf::Void*), mir::protobuf::Void*) (common.h:1030)
07:43:24 11: ==21085== by 0x4121780: (anonymous namespace)::Requests::free_buffer(int) (buffer_stream.cpp:89)
07:43:24 11: ==21085== by 0x412C080: mir::client::BufferVault::free_buffer(int) (buffer_vault.cpp:111)
07:43:24 11: ==21085== by 0x412D1A2: mir::client::BufferVault::wire_transfer_inbound(int) (buffer_vault.cpp:265)
07:43:24 11: ==21085== by 0x412BA87: (anonymous namespace)::incoming_buffer(MirBuffer*, void*) (buffer_vault.cpp:54)
07:43:24 11: ==21085== by 0x4135B2C: mir::client::Buffer::Buffer(void (*)(MirBuffer*, void*), void*, int, std::shared_ptr<mir::client::ClientBuffer> const&, MirConnection*, MirBufferUsage)::{lambda()#1}::operator()() const (buffer.cpp:33)
07:43:24 11: ==21085== by 0x4136589: std::_Function_handler<void (), mir::client::Buffer::Buffer(void (*)(MirBuffer*, void*), void*, int, std::shared_ptr<mir::client::ClientBuffer> const&, MirConnection*, MirBufferUsage)::{lambda()#1}>::_M_invoke(std::_Any_data const&) (functional:1871)
07:43:24 11: ==21085== by 0x409508F: std::function<void ()>::operator()() const (functional:2267)
07:43:24 11: ==21085== by 0x4136B78: mir::client::AtomicCallback<>::operator()() const (atomic_callback.h:56)

https://mir-jenkins.ubuntu.com/job/build-2-binpkg-mir/arch=amd64,compiler=gcc,platform=mesa,release=xenial+overlay/2680/consoleFull