Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Free memory allocated for previous system interrupt handler #951

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Apr 27, 2016

Conversation

@sergeuz
Copy link
Member

commented Apr 10, 2016

Fixes #927


Doneness:

  • Contributor has signed CLA
  • Problem and Solution clearly stated
  • Code peer reviewed
  • API tests compiled
  • Run unit/integration/application tests on device
  • Add documentation
  • Add to CHANGELOG.md after merging (add links to docs and issues)
@m-mcgowan

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Apr 12, 2016

how about adding some tests for this? registering thousands of successive handlers to the same interrupt should be sufficient to show that there is no memory leak and that deleting the old handlers works without causing a fault. We also have System.freeMemory() which could be used to validate that memory isn't being excessively leaked.

@sergeuz

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

commented Apr 12, 2016

Added slightly less involved test case that I believe has similar coverage

@m-mcgowan m-mcgowan self-assigned this Apr 23, 2016

@m-mcgowan m-mcgowan merged commit 31f11b6 into develop Apr 27, 2016

2 checks passed

continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details
continuous-integration/travis-ci/push The Travis CI build passed
Details
@m-mcgowan

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Apr 27, 2016

  • Tested on the Photon.
  • Tested on the Core

Made the tests compile on the core by commenting out GPIO, PWM and Servo tests, which are unrelated. I think we will split the no_fixture tests into Peripheral tests and System tests on the core via a conditional define. so we can continue to compile and run the tests on the core.

@technobly technobly removed the in progress label Aug 9, 2016

@technobly technobly deleted the feature/interrupt_handler_leak branch Oct 27, 2016

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
4 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.