Possible memory leak problem
- by MaiTiano
I write two pieces of c programs like following, during memcheck process using Valgrind, a lot of mem leak information is given.
int
GetMemory(int framewidth,
int frameheight,
int SR/*, int blocksize*//*,int ALL_REF_NUM*/)
{
//int i,j;
int memory_size = 0;
//int refnum = ALL_REF_NUM;
int input_search_range = SR;
memory_size += get_mem2D(&curFrameY, frameheight, framewidth);
memory_size += get_mem2D(&curFrameU, frameheight>>1, framewidth>>1);
memory_size += get_mem2D(&curFrameV, frameheight>>1, framewidth>>1);
memory_size += get_mem3D(&prevFrameY, refnum, frameheight, framewidth);// to allocate reference frame buffer accoding to the reference frame number
memory_size += get_mem3D(&prevFrameU, refnum, frameheight>>1, framewidth>>1);
memory_size += get_mem3D(&prevFrameV, refnum, frameheight>>1, framewidth>>1);
memory_size += get_mem2D(&mpFrameY, frameheight, framewidth);
memory_size += get_mem2D(&mpFrameU, frameheight>>1, framewidth>>1);
memory_size += get_mem2D(&mpFrameV, frameheight>>1, framewidth>>1);
memory_size += get_mem2D(&searchwindow, input_search_range*2 + blocksize, input_search_range*2 + blocksize);// to allocate search window according to the searchrange
/*memory_size +=*/ get_mem1D(/*&SAD_cost, height, width*/);
// memory_size += get_mem2D(&searchwindow, 80, 80);// if searchrange is 32, then only 32+1+32+15 pixels is needed in each row and col, therefore the range of
// search window is enough to be set to 80 !
memory_size += get_mem2Dint(&all_mv, height/blocksize, width/blocksize);
return 0;
}
void
FreeMemory(int refno)
{
free_mem2D(curFrameY);
free_mem2D(curFrameU);
free_mem2D(curFrameV);
free_mem3D(prevFrameY,refno);
free_mem3D(prevFrameU,refno);
free_mem3D(prevFrameV,refno);
free_mem2D(mpFrameY);
free_mem2D(mpFrameU);
free_mem2D(mpFrameV);
free_mem2D(searchwindow);
free_mem1D();
free_mem2Dint(all_mv);
}
void free_mem1D()
{
free(SAD_cost);
}
Now I hope to make sure where are the possible problems in my program?
Here I may post some valgrind information to let you know about the actual error information.
==29105== by 0x804A906: main (me_search.c:1480)
==29105==
==29105==
==29105== HEAP SUMMARY:
==29105== in use at exit: 124,088 bytes in 18 blocks
==29105== total heap usage: 37 allocs, 21 frees, 749,276 bytes allocated
==29105==
==29105== 272 bytes in 1 blocks are still reachable in loss record 1 of 18
==29105== at 0x402425F: calloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:467)
==29105== by 0x804A296: get_mem2D (me_search.c:1315)
==29105== by 0x804885E: GetMemory (me_search.c:117)
==29105== by 0x804A757: main (me_search.c:1456)
==29105==
==29105== 352 bytes in 1 blocks are still reachable in loss record 2 of 18
==29105== at 0x4024F20: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:236)
==29105== by 0x409537E: __fopen_internal (iofopen.c:76)
==29105== by 0x409544B: fopen@@GLIBC_2.1 (iofopen.c:107)
==29105== by 0x804A660: main (me_search.c:1439)
==29105==
==29105== 584 bytes in 1 blocks are still reachable in loss record 3 of 18
==29105== at 0x402425F: calloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:467)
==29105== by 0x804A296: get_mem2D (me_search.c:1315)
==29105== by 0x8048724: GetMemory (me_search.c:106)
==29105== by 0x804A757: main (me_search.c:1456)
==29105==
==29105== 584 bytes in 1 blocks are still reachable in loss record 4 of 18
==29105== at 0x402425F: calloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:467)
==29105== by 0x804A296: get_mem2D (me_search.c:1315)
==29105== by 0x8048747: GetMemory (me_search.c:107)
==29105== by 0x804A757: main (me_search.c:1456)
==29105==
==29105== 584 bytes in 1 blocks are still reachable in loss record 5 of 18
==29105== at 0x402425F: calloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:467)
==29105== by 0x804A296: get_mem2D (me_search.c:1315)
==29105== by 0x8048809: GetMemory (me_search.c:114)
==29105== by 0x804A757: main (me_search.c:1456)
==29105==
==29105== 584 bytes in 1 blocks are still reachable in loss record 6 of 18
==29105== at 0x402425F: calloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:467)
==29105== by 0x804A296: get_mem2D (me_search.c:1315)
==29105== by 0x804882C: GetMemory (me_search.c:115)
==29105== by 0x804A757: main (me_search.c:1456)
==29105==
==29105== 584 bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 7 of 18
==29105== at 0x402425F: calloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:467)
==29105== by 0x804A296: get_mem2D (me_search.c:1315)
==29105== by 0x804A4F8: get_mem3D (me_search.c:1393)
==29105== by 0x804879B: GetMemory (me_search.c:110)
==29105== by 0x804A757: main (me_search.c:1456)
==29105==
==29105== 584 bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 8 of 18
==29105== at 0x402425F: calloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:467)
==29105== by 0x804A296: get_mem2D (me_search.c:1315)
==29105== by 0x804A4F8: get_mem3D (me_search.c:1393)
==29105== by 0x80487C9: GetMemory (me_search.c:111)
==29105== by 0x804A757: main (me_search.c:1456)
==29105==
==29105== 1,168 bytes in 1 blocks are still reachable in loss record 9 of 18
==29105== at 0x402425F: calloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:467)
==29105== by 0x804A296: get_mem2D (me_search.c:1315)
==29105== by 0x8048701: GetMemory (me_search.c:105)
==29105== by 0x804A757: main (me_search.c:1456)
==29105==
==29105== 1,168 bytes in 1 blocks are still reachable in loss record 10 of 18
==29105== at 0x402425F: calloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:467)
==29105== by 0x804A296: get_mem2D (me_search.c:1315)
==29105== by 0x80487E6: GetMemory (me_search.c:113)
==29105== by 0x804A757: main (me_search.c:1456)
==29105==
==29105== 1,168 bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 11 of 18
==29105== at 0x402425F: calloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:467)
==29105== by 0x804A296: get_mem2D (me_search.c:1315)
==29105== by 0x804A4F8: get_mem3D (me_search.c:1393)
==29105== by 0x804876D: GetMemory (me_search.c:109)
==29105== by 0x804A757: main (me_search.c:1456)
==29105==
==29105== 6,336 bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 12 of 18
==29105== at 0x4024F20: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:236)
==29105== by 0x804A25C: get_mem1D (me_search.c:1295)
==29105== by 0x8048866: GetMemory (me_search.c:119)
==29105== by 0x804A757: main (me_search.c:1456)
