Re: tpool cleanup?

[Hallvard B Furuseth <h.b.furuseth@usit.uio.no>]

Howard Chu writes:
> I now see this message when slapd exits:
> == thr_debug: Leaked 2 unexited threads, 46 mutexes. ==
>
> Of course, running with tracethreads shows that slapd created and
> joined only 2 threads, so there isn't really any thread leak. This
> message doesn't seem to mean anything then. It's only counting calls
> to ldap_pvt_thread_exit, so it doesn't account for threads that exited
> simply by returning (and then being joined).

Ah, so that's what was going on.  Fixed.

> It might be interesting to make all the resources into linked lists,
> so that we can see which mutexes were leaked.  But I guess that job is
> left to other tools to do resource tracking, so that's OK.

Yes, memory debuggers like Valgrind can show a stack trace of where the
resource was created.  thr_debug can't do that, so the output is more
informative when it provokes Valgrind instead.

Still, it should be simple enough to add, I'll put it on my maybe-to-do
list:-) If you do it first, I think it'd be best to keep the lists as
SCRAMBLE()d pointers in in the allocated dummy memory.  Otherwise
accessing the list after this:
  x = malloc()
  ldap_pvt_thread_mutex_init( &x->foo );
  free( x ); /* leak x->foo mutex */
will crash - without being able to report which mutex leaked.

-- 
Hallvard