talloc & threads in rlm_eap
p.mayers at imperial.ac.uk
Mon Jun 23 23:51:44 CEST 2014
On 23/06/2014 22:37, Arran Cudbard-Bell wrote:
> Note that this wasn't the original bug, I only added VERIFY_REQUEST
> to process.c after your initial report.
Oh sure; that (totally non-obvious) talloc restriction was definitely
biting with different symptoms.
> It real issue was not breaking up the ctx trees correctly and not
> using the NULL ctx.
It might just be slowly ramping up to stable use w.r.t. cached SSL
sessions, but FYI the memory usage is very slowly climbing for the
process; I'll leave it until tomorrow, but hopefully my repeated nagging
hasn't lost us a talloc_free somewhere...
More information about the Freeradius-Devel