Hi, I run valgrind and get the following output. It points to some places where there are some "definitely memory leak". Is this a real issue or just a false alarm? [root@server ~]# cat /usr/local/freeswitch.bak/conf/test.log ==20667== Memcheck, a memory error detector. ==20667== Copyright (C) 2002-2006, and GNU GPL'd, by Julian Seward et al. ==20667== Using LibVEX rev 1658, a library for dynamic binary translation. ==20667== Copyright (C) 2004-2006, and GNU GPL'd, by OpenWorks LLP. ==20667== Using valgrind-3.2.1, a dynamic binary instrumentation framework. ==20667== Copyright (C) 2000-2006, and GNU GPL'd, by Julian Seward et al. ==20667== For more details, rerun with: -v ==20667== ==20667== My PID = 20667, parent PID = 19188. Prog and args are: ==20667== /usr/local/freeswitch.bak/bin/freeswitch ==20667== -vg ==20667== -log ==20667== /usr/local/freeswitch.bak/log/ ==20667== -conf ==20667== /usr/local/freeswitch.bak/conf/ ==20667== -db ==20667== /usr/local/freeswitch.bak/db/ ==20667== ==20667== Warning: set address range perms: large range 1024004096 (defined) ==20667== Warning: set address range perms: large range 1024004096 (defined) ==20667== Warning: set address range perms: large range 1024004096 (noaccess) ==20667== Warning: set address range perms: large range 1024004096 (noaccess) ==20667== Warning: set address range perms: large range 1024004096 (defined) ==20667== Warning: set address range perms: large range 1024004096 (defined) ==20667== Warning: set address range perms: large range 1024004096 (noaccess) ==20667== Warning: set address range perms: large range 1024004096 (noaccess) ==20667== ==20667== ERROR SUMMARY: 0 errors from 0 contexts (suppressed: 68 from 1) ==20667== malloc/free: in use at exit: 1,121,194 bytes in 426 blocks. ==20667== malloc/free: 4,603,109 allocs, 4,602,683 frees, 1,569,942,087 bytes allocated. ==20667== For counts of detected errors, rerun with: -v ==20667== searching for pointers to 426 not-freed blocks. ==20667== checked 2,477,072 bytes. ==20667== ==20667== 513 bytes in 3 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 15 of 33 ==20667== at 0x4A05809: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:149) ==20667== by 0x4D1AA25: crypto_alloc (alloc.c:97) ==20667== by 0x4D18551: aes_icm_alloc_ismacryp (aes_icm.c:115) ==20667== by 0x4D16F59: cipher_type_self_test (cipher.c:264) ==20667== by 0x4D1A456: crypto_kernel_load_cipher_type (crypto_kernel.c:310) ==20667== by 0x4D1A955: crypto_kernel_init (crypto_kernel.c:154) ==20667== by 0x4D14D68: srtp_init (srtp.c:1081) ==20667== by 0x4C83A1A: switch_rtp_init (switch_rtp.c:407) ==20667== by 0x4C70935: switch_core_init (switch_core.c:1112) ==20667== by 0x4C719AF: switch_core_init_and_modload (switch_core.c:1278) ==20667== by 0x4025BA: main (switch.c:701) ==20667== ==20667== ==20667== 576 bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 17 of 33 ==20667== at 0x4A05809: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:149) ==20667== by 0x64B80D2: sofia_glue_do_invite (sofia_glue.c:1488) ==20667== by 0x6490913: sofia_on_init (mod_sofia.c:102) ==20667== by 0x4C69523: switch_core_session_run (switch_core_state_machine.c:480) ==20667== by 0x4C66D0F: switch_core_session_thread (switch_core_session.c:1065) ==20667== by 0x3B85806366: start_thread (in /lib64/libpthread-2.5.so) ==20667== by 0x3B850D2F7C: clone (in /lib64/libc-2.5.so) ==20667== ==20667== ==20667== 640 bytes in 2 blocks are possibly lost in loss record 18 of 33 ==20667== at 0x4A04B32: calloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:279) ==20667== by 0x3B84C0FF12: _dl_allocate_tls (in /lib64/ld-2.5.so) ==20667== by 0x3B85806AC2: pthread_create@@GLIBC_2.2.5 (in /lib64/ libpthread-2.5.so) ==20667== by 0x4C6FB05: switch_core_launch_thread (switch_core.c:390) ==20667== by 0x4C77DE0: switch_loadable_module_init (switch_loadable_module.c:121) ==20667== by 0x4C71AA9: switch_core_init_and_modload (switch_core.c:1307) ==20667== by 0x4025BA: main (switch.c:701) ==20667== ==20667== ==20667== 1,152 bytes in 2 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 23 of 33 ==20667== at 0x4A05809: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:149) ==20667== by 0x6499E41: sofia_handle_sip_i_invite (sofia.c:4891) ==20667== by 0x649E733: sofia_event_callback (sofia.c:478) ==20667== by 0x6519D19: nua_application_event (nua_stack.c:393) ==20667== by 0x65971E8: su_base_port_execute_msgs (su_base_port.c:280) ==20667== by 0x6596F60: su_base_port_getmsgs (su_base_port.c:202) ==20667== by 0x6597503: su_base_port_step (su_base_port.c:473) ==20667== by 0x659A2C5: su_port_step (su_port.h:340) ==20667== by 0x659A28D: su_root_step (su_root.c:858) ==20667== by 0x64A8E9A: sofia_profile_thread_run (sofia.c:877) ==20667== by 0x3B85806366: start_thread (in /lib64/libpthread-2.5.so) ==20667== by 0x3B850D2F7C: clone (in /lib64/libc-2.5.so) ==20667== ==20667== ==20667== 2,211 bytes in 201 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 24 of 33 ==20667== at 0x4A05809: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:149) ==20667== by 0x3B85078AC1: strdup (in /lib64/libc-2.5.so) ==20667== by 0x72EE44F: ??? (mod_highroute.c:1445) ==20667== by 0x4C67197: switch_core_session_exec (switch_core_session.c:1473) ==20667== by 0x4C6761E: switch_core_session_execute_application (switch_core_session.c:1395) ==20667== by 0x4C6A892: switch_core_session_run (switch_core_state_machine.c:166) ==20667== by 0x4C66D0F: switch_core_session_thread (switch_core_session.c:1065) ==20667== by 0x3B85806366: start_thread (in /lib64/libpthread-2.5.so) ==20667== by 0x3B850D2F7C: clone (in /lib64/libc-2.5.so) ==20667== ==20667== LEAK SUMMARY: ==20667== definitely lost: 4,452 bytes in 207 blocks. ==20667== possibly lost: 640 bytes in 2 blocks. ==20667== still reachable: 1,116,102 bytes in 217 blocks. ==20667== suppressed: 0 bytes in 0 blocks. ==20667== Reachable blocks (those to which a pointer was found) are not shown. ==20667== To see them, rerun with: --show-reachable=yes