GNU bug report logs -
#43389
28.0.50; Emacs memory leaks
Previous Next
Full log
View this message in rfc822 format
Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:
>> Some interesting observations:
>> - (garbage-collect) takes forever, like on the order of 5-10
>> minutes, with one CPU core pegged to 100% and emacs frozen.
>
> Is this with the default values of gc-cons-threshold and
> gc-cons-percentage?
Yes, and they're both printed in the logs: threshold 800000,
percentage 0.1.
>> - The leaking stops for a while after (garbage-collect). It
>> was leaking 1MB per second for this last log, and stopped
>> growing after the garbage collection.
>
> Now, what happens in that session once per second (in an
> otherwise idle Emacs, I presume?) to cause such memory
> consumption? Some timers? If you run with a breakpoint in
> malloc that just shows the backtrace and continues, do you see
> what could consume 1MB every second?
Not an idle emacs at all, in this case. I have seen the memory
growth in an idle emacs, but the only one I can reproduce it on is
the emacs-slack one, which is connected to a corporate Slack
account. Tons of short messages streaming in over the network and
being displayed in rotating buffers, with images mixed in. It's a
big 'ol "web 2.0" API... it can easily pass 1MB/s of bloated JSON
messages through. This is one _very active_ emacs.
The original strace logs and valgrind output I posted before
showed a random assortment of calls from gnutls, imagemagick, and
lisp strings, with lisp strings dominating the malloc calls
(enlarge_buffer_text, mostly).
>> Is there any way to get the same info without actually reaping
>> dead references?
>
> What do you mean by "reaping dead references" here?
>
>> It could be that there really were 4.3GB of dead references.
>
> Not sure I understand what are you trying to establish here.
>
GC is running through a list of active allocations and freeing the
ones with no remaining references, right? Presumably, if a lot of
active malloc() allocations are no longer refernced, and
(garbage-collect) calls free() on a bunch of blocks. I'm
wondering how to figure out how much memory a call to
(garbage-collect) has actually freed. Possibly a sort of "dry
run" where it performs the GC algorithm, but doesn't release any
memory.
(I'm very much assuming how emacs memory management works. Please
corect me if I'm wrong.)
> There's only one garbage-collect, it is called for _any_ GC.
>
> What do you mean by "during normal use" in this sentence:
>
> I certainly don't notice 5-10 minute long pauses during normal
> use, though "gcs-done" is incrementing.
>
> How is what you did here, where GC took several minutes,
> different from "normal usage"?
In this log, I am explicitly executing "(garbage-collect)", and it
takes 10 minutes, during which the UI is unresponsive and
sometimes even turns grey when the window stops redrawing.
By "normal use", I mean that I use this emacs instance on-and-off
all day long. I would notice if it were freezing for minutes at a
time, and it definitely is not.
As far as I understand, garbage collection is supposed to happen
automatically during idle. I would certainly notice if it locked
up the whole instance for 10 minutes from an idle GC. I think
this means the automatic garbage collection is either not
happening, or running on a different thread, or being interrupted,
or simply works differently. I have no idea, hence asking you :)
The confusing part is that "gcs-done" increments a lot between my
manual (garbage-collect) calls. It looks like it does about 500
per day. There is no way emacs freezes and pegs a CPU core to max
500 times per day, but it does exactly that every time I manually
execute garbage-collect.
Side note: it inflated to 7670MB overnight. I'm running
(garbage-collect) as I type this, but it has been churning for 30
minutes with the UI frozen, and still isn't done. I'm going to
give up and kill it if it doesn't finish soon, as I kind of need
that 8GB back.
-Trevor
This bug report was last modified 4 years and 57 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.