[Freeswitch-users] suspecting memory leak about mutex

[hkchoi]

Hello freeswitch-users, 
 
there is some doubt about memory leak in freeswitch implemetation.
 
when a channel is created, some mutex are created as below.
 
SWITCH_DECLARE(switch_status_t) switch_channel_alloc(switch_channel_t **channel, switch_call_direction_t direction, switch_memory_pool_t *pool)
{
    switch_assert(pool != NULL);
    if (((*channel) = switch_core_alloc(pool, sizeof(switch_channel_t))) == 0) {
        return SWITCH_STATUS_MEMERR;
    }
    switch_event_create_plain(&(*channel)->variables, SWITCH_EVENT_CHANNEL_DATA);
    switch_core_hash_init(&(*channel)->private_hash, pool);
    switch_queue_create(&(*channel)->dtmf_queue, SWITCH_DTMF_LOG_LEN, pool);
    switch_queue_create(&(*channel)->dtmf_log_queue, SWITCH_DTMF_LOG_LEN, pool);
    switch_mutex_init(&(*channel)->dtmf_mutex, SWITCH_MUTEX_NESTED, pool);
    switch_mutex_init(&(*channel)->flag_mutex, SWITCH_MUTEX_NESTED, pool);
    switch_mutex_init(&(*channel)->state_mutex, SWITCH_MUTEX_NESTED, pool);
    switch_mutex_init(&(*channel)->thread_mutex, SWITCH_MUTEX_NESTED, pool);
    switch_mutex_init(&(*channel)->profile_mutex, SWITCH_MUTEX_NESTED, pool);
    ...
}
 
And,  It seems that some memory is newly allocated in switch_mutex_init() by comments in the following code.
 
[ switch_apr.h ]
/**
 * Create and initialize a mutex that can be used to synchronize threads.
 * @param lock the memory address where the newly created mutex will be
 *        stored.
 * @param flags Or'ed value of:
 * <PRE>
 *           SWITCH_THREAD_MUTEX_DEFAULT   platform-optimal lock behavior.
 *           SWITCH_THREAD_MUTEX_NESTED    enable nested (recursive) locks.
 *           SWITCH_THREAD_MUTEX_UNNESTED  disable nested locks (non-recursive).
 * </PRE>
 * @param pool the pool from which to allocate the mutex.
 * @warning Be cautious in using SWITCH_THREAD_MUTEX_DEFAULT.  While this is the
 * most optimial mutex based on a given platform's performance charateristics,
 * it will behave as either a nested or an unnested lock.
 *
*/
SWITCH_DECLARE(switch_status_t) switch_mutex_init(switch_mutex_t ** lock, unsigned int flags, switch_memory_pool_t *pool);

/**
 * Destroy the mutex and free the memory associated with the lock.
 * @param lock the mutex to destroy.
 */
SWITCH_DECLARE(switch_status_t) switch_mutex_destroy(switch_mutex_t *lock); 
but, I can't find any code that is related with destroying mutex.
 
In my opinion, 
altough a memory size is very tiny for creating mutex, the leaking memory will be more bigger as times go on.
 
It doesn't need to destory the mutex when a channel is destory?
 
could someone explain about this?
 
Thank you in advance.
 
Regards,
hkchoi
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.freeswitch.org/pipermail/freeswitch-users/attachments/20130723/c7952163/attachment-0001.html