Increased Rlk (leak) on balsa after landing of bug 354787

VERIFIED FIXED

Status

()

Core
Internationalization
--
minor
VERIFIED FIXED
11 years ago
11 years ago

People

(Reporter: Adam Guthrie, Assigned: Ben Turner (not reading bugmail, use the needinfo flag!))

Tracking

({mlk, regression})

Trunk
x86
Linux
mlk, regression
Points:
---

Firefox Tracking Flags

(Not tracked)

Details

Attachments

(1 attachment, 2 obsolete attachments)

(Reporter)

Description

11 years ago
--NEW-LEAKS-----------------------------------leaks------leaks%
nsCaseConversionImp2                             12          -

2524	MOZ_CO_DATE=2006:12:01:10:44
2536	MOZ_CO_DATE=2006:12:01:12:16

Check-ins: http://bonsai.mozilla.org/cvsquery.cgi?treeid=default&module=all&branch=HEAD&branchtype=match&dir=&file=&filetype=match&who=&whotype=match&sortby=Date&hours=2&date=explicit&mindate=2006%3A12%3A01%3A10%3A44%3A00&maxdate=2006%3A12%3A01%3A12%3A16%3A00&cvsroot=%2Fcvsroot

Not a huge deal, but probably something that should be fixed.
I think this is WONTFIX as the basic idea was to leave a static instance hanging around that would persist through XPCOM re-initialization.
Assignee: smontagu → bent.mozilla
agree, but why are we leaking 12 objects? or is that 12 bytes?
That's 12 bytes ( = 1 instance).

-> WONTFIX
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 11 years ago
Resolution: --- → WONTFIX

Comment 4

11 years ago
We should make it not screw up the leak stats. Can we just remove refcnt logging from this class?
Status: RESOLVED → REOPENED
Resolution: WONTFIX → ---
If I'm reading this right then we'd have to manually implement addref/release. Is there no other way to disable refcount logging?

Comment 6

11 years ago
Correct.
Created attachment 247467 [details] [diff] [review]
Patch

Here we go.
Attachment #247467 - Flags: review?(benjamin)
Status: REOPENED → ASSIGNED
Why don't we just make the refcount always 1? This object never gets destroyed anyway.

Comment 9

11 years ago
Why do we have a refcount at all?
Wait, so you want them to be no-ops? Right now no one else creates one of these guys, but do we really want to neuter all instances?

Comment 11

11 years ago
Why do we need more than one of them? Always return the singleton instance.
Right.

Updated

11 years ago
Attachment #247467 - Flags: review?(benjamin) → review-
Created attachment 247899 [details] [diff] [review]
Patch

Okay, now just returns 1.
Attachment #247467 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #247899 - Flags: review?(benjamin)

Comment 14

11 years ago
Comment on attachment 247899 [details] [diff] [review]
Patch

This is ok, but I think you still need a singleton-constructor.
Attachment #247899 - Flags: review?(benjamin) → review+
Created attachment 250367 [details] [diff] [review]
Patch

Now with singleton constructor. I also removed the unused and potentially problematic NS_NewCaseConversion function.
Attachment #247899 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #250367 - Flags: review?(benjamin)

Updated

11 years ago
Attachment #250367 - Flags: review?(benjamin) → review+
Fixed on trunk.
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 11 years ago11 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
And nsCaseConversionImp2 has dropped from the rlk logs
Status: RESOLVED → VERIFIED
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.