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

SoundFont memory leak #82

Closed
derselbst opened this issue Jul 20, 2010 · 4 comments
Closed

SoundFont memory leak #82

derselbst opened this issue Jul 20, 2010 · 4 comments

Comments

@derselbst
Copy link
Member

There seems to be a problem with the current sample reference counting algorithm. When I load a bank, then process a MIDI file through the synthesizer, then unload, the SoundFont fails to unload because several of the samples which were used still have positive reference counts.

Even resetting the synthesizer before unloading fails. As a workaround, I have extended the SoundFont delete function to include a force parameter, so that all unchecked calls to the delete function may force it to ignore the reference counts. This is probably not an ideal long term solution, however.

Reported by: kode54

Original Ticket: fluidsynth/tickets/83

@derselbst
Copy link
Member Author

What version of FluidSynth are you using? Is this bug also present in current trunk version of FluidSynth?

Original comment by: diwic

@derselbst
Copy link
Member Author

I am using revision 328. Since instruments were keeping some non-zero reference count on unload, I am using the above mentioned workaround to forcibly free all instruments when deleting the FluidSynth instance.

I will update to the latest revision later, but there are a number of changes I have made as well that may conflict. None of which have anything to do with sample/instrument reference counts, except that force unload on delete hack.

Original comment by: kode54

@derselbst
Copy link
Member Author

  • status changed from new to closed
  • resolution set to fixed

I've done some rewriting of how this is handled in r415. As of that version, I can not replicate the issue.

Original comment by: diwic

@derselbst
Copy link
Member Author

That should have been r414, sorry.

Original comment by: diwic

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants