Bug 868420 - Win7 32bit client: Remote-Viewer.exe listed as having a memory leak by RADAR
Win7 32bit client: Remote-Viewer.exe listed as having a memory leak by RADAR
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization Manager
Classification: Red Hat
Component: mingw-virt-viewer (Show other bugs)
Unspecified Unspecified
unspecified Severity unspecified
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Marc-Andre Lureau
Desktop QE
Depends On:
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2012-10-19 15:30 EDT by Vimal Patel
Modified: 2012-10-22 10:16 EDT (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2012-10-22 10:16:21 EDT
Type: Bug
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---

Attachments (Terms of Use)

  None (edit)
Description Vimal Patel 2012-10-19 15:30:51 EDT
Description of problem:
On Win732 bit client, in the registry remote-viewer.exe is listed as a  DiagnosedApplications under HeapLeakDetection under RADAR, which is a Win7 built in utility to catch applications that have memory leaks.

I saw this in the registry after running QE's test run on Win7 32bit, which includes switching full screen, using the user portal, power user portal, doing migrations, native & legacy usb testing. 

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
RHEVM 3.1, si20
Win7 Client:
remote-viewer: 0.5.3
USB Clerk

Guest: RHEL 6.3 64

How reproducible:
Not sure

Steps to Reproduce:
Actual results:

Expected results:

Additional info:
Comment 1 Marc-Andre Lureau 2012-10-19 15:39:02 EDT
thanks for the report, however I doubt we can fix it without more details. Gobject/Gtk itself does "leak", but not over time. This is what matters. You would need to tell use in which circunstances the memory usage is growing. If it's not growing, it's probably harmless, and looking for a leak blindlessly is like searching for a needle in a haystack! Until we have more information, I would suggest to close the bug.
Comment 2 Vimal Patel 2012-10-22 10:16:21 EDT
I agree with your comments Marc-Andre.  I will close the bug as insufficient data.  I will try to look into it a little more, if I get more details of when this happens and how significant it is I will reopen this bug.

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.