Subject: Re: memory (leak) debugging

Re: memory (leak) debugging

From: Simon Josefsson <>
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 10:59:05 +0200

Daniel Stenberg <> writes:

> On Mon, 30 Mar 2009, Simon Josefsson wrote:
>> I gave up on dmalloc a long time ago, in my experience valgrind leads to
>> better results and doesn't require changes to the build.
>> In most of my other projects, I always set up so that the self-tests are run
>> under valgrind automatically (if valgrind is installed). Maybe that would
>> help libssh2? We need more self-tests, though...
> Yes, we need more self-tests and running them with valgrind is a good way to
> catch most of the problems. But there are two buts here that our current leak
> (Daniel Johnson's report) shows us where just relying on valgrind isn't good
> enough:
> A) valgrind slows down the execution a lot. I can get the leak to occur in my
> tests but it seems virtually impossible to make happen when valgrind
> monitors/slows down the code. A plain memory-leak detection would be
> almost no extra overhead.
> B) when people detect leaks on non-valgrind platforms

Sure. More testing can never hurt. As long as it is built
optionally.. ;)

I would worry about A) indicating some more worry-some problem though,
it smells like a race issue?


libssh2-devel mailing list
Received on 2009-03-30