3

我已经尝试调试了一个月，确定这是我糟糕的编程习惯，但我认为这可能是一个错误，所以我在报告之前先在这里询问。

考虑以下代码：

#include <sys/resource.h> // memory management.
#include <stdio.h>
#include <iostream>
#include <iomanip>

#include "opencv2/highgui/highgui.hpp"
#include "opencv2/core/core.hpp"
#include "opencv2/imgproc/imgproc.hpp"
#include "opencv2/video/background_segm.hpp"

using namespace std;
using namespace cv;

// Load frame from disk.
void readFrame(int frameNum, Mat &frame) {
    // Construct filenames
    Mat image;
    stringstream number, filename;

    number << setw(7) << setfill('0') << frameNum; // expecting over 1e10 images over the installation period.
    filename << "../images/store-" << number.str() << ".jpg"; // assumes jpegs!//
    cout << "Loading filename: " << filename.str() << endl;

    image = imread( filename.str() );

    if (image.empty() or !image.data) {
        cout << "Input image empty:\n";
    }

    frame = image.clone();
}

// Class to hold the perceptual chunks.
class percepUnit {

    public:
        cv::Mat image; // percept itself
        cv::Mat mask; // alpha channel

        // constructor method
        percepUnit(cv::Mat &ROI, cv::Mat &alpha, int ix, int iy, int iw, int ih, int area)  {
            image = ROI.clone();
            mask = alpha.clone();
        }
};

// Segment foreground from background
void segmentForeground(list<percepUnit*> &percepUnitsForeground, Mat &foreground, Mat &frame) {
    Mat contourImage = Mat(foreground.rows, foreground.cols, CV_8UC1, Scalar::all(0));
    vector<vector<Point>> contours;
    int area;

    // The following causes strange spikes in memory usage:
    // find contours
    findContours(foreground, contours, CV_RETR_EXTERNAL, CV_CHAIN_APPROX_SIMPLE);

    for (int idx = 0; idx < contours.size(); idx++) {

        area = contourArea(contours[idx]);

        if (area > 100) {

            percepUnit *thisUnit = new percepUnit(frame, contourImage, 0, 0, 100,100, area);
            percepUnitsForeground.push_back(thisUnit); // Append to percepUnits
        }
    }

    /* The following does not:
    findContours(foreground, contours, CV_RETR_EXTERNAL, CV_CHAIN_APPROX_SIMPLE);

    for (int idx = 0; idx < contours.size(); idx++) {
        area = contourArea(contours[idx]);
    }*/

    /* Neither does this:
    for (int idx = 0; idx < 10; idx++) {
        percepUnit *thisUnit = new percepUnit(frame, contourImage, 0, 0, 100,100, area);
        percepUnitsForeground.push_back(thisUnit); // Append to percepUnits
    }*/
}

int main(int argc, const char** argv)
{
    int frameCount = 78298; 
    Mat frame, foreground;
    BackgroundSubtractorMOG2 MOG2model;
    list<percepUnit*> scratchPercepUnitsForeground;

    // add rusage stuff
    struct rusage usage; // memory usage.

    for(int i=0; i<= 75; i++)
    {
        // run full segmenter here.  (background disabled)

        readFrame(frameCount, frame); // was frame = readFrame();

        // Only process if this frame actually loaded (non empty)
        if ( not frame.empty() ) {

            MOG2model(frame,foreground); // Update MOG2 model, downscale?

            // before we segment again clear scratch
            // TODO how to delete the actual memory allocated? Run delete on everything?
            for (list<percepUnit*>::iterator percepIter = scratchPercepUnitsForeground.begin(); 
                 percepIter != scratchPercepUnitsForeground.end();
                 percepIter++) {

                delete *percepIter; // delete what we point to.
                //percepIter = scratchPercepUnitsForeground.erase(percepIter); // remove the pointer itself, and update the iterator.
            }
            // Added with EDIT1
            scratchPercepUnitsForeground.clear();

            // Segment the foreground regions and generate boolImage to extract from background.
            segmentForeground(scratchPercepUnitsForeground, foreground, frame);

        }

        frameCount++;

        getrusage(RUSAGE_SELF, &usage);
        cout << "DEBUG leakTest_bug_report " << i << " " << usage.ru_maxrss/1024.0 << endl;
    }

    return 0;
}

如果您使用此处提供的图像（http://www.ekran.org/tmp/images.tar.gz），您会发现程序的内存使用量增加，并且似乎随着前景轮廓的数量而增加。由于我正在为每一帧清除我的存储空间 (scratchPercepUnitsForeground)，我不明白为什么应该增加内存使用量。segmentForeground() 函数应该退出，为每一帧释放所有使用的内存。内存使用量应该随着时间的推移保持不变，因为我们只在函数退出后检查内存使用量。似乎有些东西我无法弄清楚。

如果我只运行 findContours() 部分而没有 percepUnit() 构造函数，则内存使用量是不变的，正如我所料。如果我只运行不带 findContours() 的 percepUnit() 构造函数，则内存使用量是恒定的。仅当我同时使用两者时，内存使用量才会增加。请参阅上面的 segmentForeground() 中的注释代码。

我已经在我的两台机器（AMD64、linux）上确认了这个问题，并运行了 opencv 2.4.6.1 和 2.4.5。

编辑1

上面的代码已更改为包含以下建议，但问题仍然存在。

这是内存增加的样子：

内存使用情况
（来源：ekran.org）

红线是调用 findContours() 和构造函数时看到的内存增加（与上面链接的测试图像相关）。下面的稳定行是我们运行 findContours() 或构造函数的两种情况。

Valgrind 输出

==2055== Memcheck, a memory error detector
==2055== Copyright (C) 2002-2011, and GNU GPL'd, by Julian Seward et al.
==2055== Using Valgrind-3.7.0 and LibVEX; rerun with -h for copyright info
==2055== Command: ./leakTest
==2055== 
==2055== 
==2055== HEAP SUMMARY:
==2055==     in use at exit: 217,751,704 bytes in 112 blocks
==2055==   total heap usage: 800,066 allocs, 799,954 frees, 29,269,767,865 bytes allocated
==2055== 
==2055== 568 bytes in 1 blocks are still reachable in loss record 1 of 12
==2055==    at 0x4C2B6CD: malloc (in /usr/lib/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
==2055==    by 0x63A720A: __fopen_internal (iofopen.c:76)
==2055==    by 0xA8BC050: libjpeg_general_init (in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libjpeg.so.8.0.2)
==2055==    by 0x400F305: call_init.part.0 (dl-init.c:85)
==2055==    by 0x400F3DE: _dl_init (dl-init.c:52)
==2055==    by 0x40016E9: ??? (in /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/ld-2.15.so)
==2055== 
==2055== 2,072 bytes in 1 blocks are still reachable in loss record 2 of 12
==2055==    at 0x4C2B6CD: malloc (in /usr/lib/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
==2055==    by 0x1495F675: ??? (in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpixman-1.so.0.24.4)
==2055==    by 0x1495E4AE: ??? (in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpixman-1.so.0.24.4)
==2055==    by 0x14950888: ??? (in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpixman-1.so.0.24.4)
==2055==    by 0x149253B8: ??? (in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpixman-1.so.0.24.4)
==2055==    by 0x400F305: call_init.part.0 (dl-init.c:85)
==2055==    by 0x400F3DE: _dl_init (dl-init.c:52)
==2055==    by 0x40016E9: ??? (in /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/ld-2.15.so)
==2055== 
==2055== 2,072 bytes in 1 blocks are still reachable in loss record 3 of 12
==2055==    at 0x4C2B6CD: malloc (in /usr/lib/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
==2055==    by 0x1495F675: ??? (in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpixman-1.so.0.24.4)
==2055==    by 0x1495E0EF: ??? (in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpixman-1.so.0.24.4)
==2055==    by 0x14950890: ??? (in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpixman-1.so.0.24.4)
==2055==    by 0x149253B8: ??? (in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpixman-1.so.0.24.4)
==2055==    by 0x400F305: call_init.part.0 (dl-init.c:85)
==2055==    by 0x400F3DE: _dl_init (dl-init.c:52)
==2055==    by 0x40016E9: ??? (in /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/ld-2.15.so)
==2055== 
==2055== 2,072 bytes in 1 blocks are still reachable in loss record 4 of 12
==2055==    at 0x4C2B6CD: malloc (in /usr/lib/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
==2055==    by 0x1495F675: ??? (in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpixman-1.so.0.24.4)
==2055==    by 0x14971A6F: ??? (in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpixman-1.so.0.24.4)
==2055==    by 0x14950898: ??? (in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpixman-1.so.0.24.4)
==2055==    by 0x149253B8: ??? (in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpixman-1.so.0.24.4)
==2055==    by 0x400F305: call_init.part.0 (dl-init.c:85)
==2055==    by 0x400F3DE: _dl_init (dl-init.c:52)
==2055==    by 0x40016E9: ??? (in /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/ld-2.15.so)
==2055== 
==2055== 2,072 bytes in 1 blocks are still reachable in loss record 5 of 12
==2055==    at 0x4C2B6CD: malloc (in /usr/lib/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
==2055==    by 0x1495F675: ??? (in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpixman-1.so.0.24.4)
==2055==    by 0x1499024F: ??? (in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpixman-1.so.0.24.4)
==2055==    by 0x149508A0: ??? (in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpixman-1.so.0.24.4)
==2055==    by 0x149253B8: ??? (in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpixman-1.so.0.24.4)
==2055==    by 0x400F305: call_init.part.0 (dl-init.c:85)
==2055==    by 0x400F3DE: _dl_init (dl-init.c:52)
==2055==    by 0x40016E9: ??? (in /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/ld-2.15.so)
==2055== 
==2055== 2,072 bytes in 1 blocks are still reachable in loss record 6 of 12
==2055==    at 0x4C2B6CD: malloc (in /usr/lib/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
==2055==    by 0x1495F675: ??? (in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpixman-1.so.0.24.4)
==2055==    by 0x149610EF: ??? (in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpixman-1.so.0.24.4)
==2055==    by 0x149253B8: ??? (in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpixman-1.so.0.24.4)
==2055==    by 0x400F305: call_init.part.0 (dl-init.c:85)
==2055==    by 0x400F3DE: _dl_init (dl-init.c:52)
==2055==    by 0x40016E9: ??? (in /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/ld-2.15.so)
==2055== 
==2055== 4,096 bytes in 1 blocks are still reachable in loss record 7 of 12
==2055==    at 0x4C2B6CD: malloc (in /usr/lib/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
==2055==    by 0xA8BC067: libjpeg_general_init (in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libjpeg.so.8.0.2)
==2055==    by 0x400F305: call_init.part.0 (dl-init.c:85)
==2055==    by 0x400F3DE: _dl_init (dl-init.c:52)
==2055==    by 0x40016E9: ??? (in /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/ld-2.15.so)
==2055== 
==2055== 1,555,228 bytes in 1 blocks are possibly lost in loss record 8 of 12
==2055==    at 0x4C2B6CD: malloc (in /usr/lib/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
==2055==    by 0x4E87A90: cv::fastMalloc(unsigned long) (in /usr/local/lib/libopencv_core.so.2.4.5)
==2055==    by 0x4ECDBF1: cv::Mat::create(int, int const*, int) (in /usr/local/lib/libopencv_core.so.2.4.5)
==2055==    by 0x4ECE378: cv::_OutputArray::create(int, int, int, int, bool, int) const (in /usr/local/lib/libopencv_core.so.2.4.5)
==2055==    by 0x4F52F7D: cv::Mat::copyTo(cv::_OutputArray const&) const (in /usr/local/lib/libopencv_core.so.2.4.5)
==2055==    by 0x40253C: cv::Mat::clone() const (mat.hpp:335)
==2055==    by 0x4028D5: percepUnit::percepUnit(cv::Mat&, cv::Mat&, int, int, int, int, int) (leakTest.cpp:43)
==2055==    by 0x401E0E: segmentForeground(std::list<percepUnit*, std::allocator<percepUnit*> >&, cv::Mat&, cv::Mat&) (leakTest.cpp:63)
==2055==    by 0x40202D: main (leakTest.cpp:114)
==2055== 
==2055== 37,325,024 bytes in 8 blocks are possibly lost in loss record 9 of 12
==2055==    at 0x4C2B6CD: malloc (in /usr/lib/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
==2055==    by 0x4E87A90: cv::fastMalloc(unsigned long) (in /usr/local/lib/libopencv_core.so.2.4.5)
==2055==    by 0x4ECDBF1: cv::Mat::create(int, int const*, int) (in /usr/local/lib/libopencv_core.so.2.4.5)
==2055==    by 0x4ECE378: cv::_OutputArray::create(int, int, int, int, bool, int) const (in /usr/local/lib/libopencv_core.so.2.4.5)
==2055==    by 0x4F52F7D: cv::Mat::copyTo(cv::_OutputArray const&) const (in /usr/local/lib/libopencv_core.so.2.4.5)
==2055==    by 0x40253C: cv::Mat::clone() const (mat.hpp:335)
==2055==    by 0x402897: percepUnit::percepUnit(cv::Mat&, cv::Mat&, int, int, int, int, int) (leakTest.cpp:42)
==2055==    by 0x401E0E: segmentForeground(std::list<percepUnit*, std::allocator<percepUnit*> >&, cv::Mat&, cv::Mat&) (leakTest.cpp:63)
==2055==    by 0x40202D: main (leakTest.cpp:114)
==2055== 
==2055== 52,877,752 bytes in 34 blocks are indirectly lost in loss record 10 of 12
==2055==    at 0x4C2B6CD: malloc (in /usr/lib/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
==2055==    by 0x4E87A90: cv::fastMalloc(unsigned long) (in /usr/local/lib/libopencv_core.so.2.4.5)
==2055==    by 0x4ECDBF1: cv::Mat::create(int, int const*, int) (in /usr/local/lib/libopencv_core.so.2.4.5)
==2055==    by 0x4ECE378: cv::_OutputArray::create(int, int, int, int, bool, int) const (in /usr/local/lib/libopencv_core.so.2.4.5)
==2055==    by 0x4F52F7D: cv::Mat::copyTo(cv::_OutputArray const&) const (in /usr/local/lib/libopencv_core.so.2.4.5)
==2055==    by 0x40253C: cv::Mat::clone() const (mat.hpp:335)
==2055==    by 0x4028D5: percepUnit::percepUnit(cv::Mat&, cv::Mat&, int, int, int, int, int) (leakTest.cpp:43)
==2055==    by 0x401E0E: segmentForeground(std::list<percepUnit*, std::allocator<percepUnit*> >&, cv::Mat&, cv::Mat&) (leakTest.cpp:63)
==2055==    by 0x40202D: main (leakTest.cpp:114)
==2055== 
==2055== 125,971,956 bytes in 27 blocks are indirectly lost in loss record 11 of 12
==2055==    at 0x4C2B6CD: malloc (in /usr/lib/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
==2055==    by 0x4E87A90: cv::fastMalloc(unsigned long) (in /usr/local/lib/libopencv_core.so.2.4.5)
==2055==    by 0x4ECDBF1: cv::Mat::create(int, int const*, int) (in /usr/local/lib/libopencv_core.so.2.4.5)
==2055==    by 0x4ECE378: cv::_OutputArray::create(int, int, int, int, bool, int) const (in /usr/local/lib/libopencv_core.so.2.4.5)
==2055==    by 0x4F52F7D: cv::Mat::copyTo(cv::_OutputArray const&) const (in /usr/local/lib/libopencv_core.so.2.4.5)
==2055==    by 0x40253C: cv::Mat::clone() const (mat.hpp:335)
==2055==    by 0x402897: percepUnit::percepUnit(cv::Mat&, cv::Mat&, int, int, int, int, int) (leakTest.cpp:42)
==2055==    by 0x401E0E: segmentForeground(std::list<percepUnit*, std::allocator<percepUnit*> >&, cv::Mat&, cv::Mat&) (leakTest.cpp:63)
==2055==    by 0x40202D: main (leakTest.cpp:114)
==2055== 
==2055== 178,856,428 (6,720 direct, 178,849,708 indirect) bytes in 35 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 12 of 12
==2055==    at 0x4C2B1C7: operator new(unsigned long) (in /usr/lib/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
==2055==    by 0x401DD3: segmentForeground(std::list<percepUnit*, std::allocator<percepUnit*> >&, cv::Mat&, cv::Mat&) (leakTest.cpp:63)
==2055==    by 0x40202D: main (leakTest.cpp:114)
==2055== 
==2055== LEAK SUMMARY:
==2055==    definitely lost: 6,720 bytes in 35 blocks
==2055==    indirectly lost: 178,849,708 bytes in 61 blocks
==2055==      possibly lost: 38,880,252 bytes in 9 blocks
==2055==    still reachable: 15,024 bytes in 7 blocks
==2055==         suppressed: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
==2055== 
==2055== For counts of detected and suppressed errors, rerun with: -v
==2055== ERROR SUMMARY: 3 errors from 3 contexts (suppressed: 2 from 2)

所以基本上这似乎告诉我们在执行 clone() 的 percepUnit 构造函数中可能存在问题。在没有 findContours() 的情况下运行构造函数不会显示内存增加（如上所述），其中包括使用“new”。jpeg 阅读器也经过单元测试，没有增加内存。因此，valgrind 输出似乎根本没有帮助。

这应该是可重现的！在提供答案之前，请确保您可以复制它。

EDIT2（修改代码和 valgrind 输出，删除指针方法）

在这里，我将列表从指针列表更改为实例列表。确认内存增加。

#include <sys/resource.h> // memory management.
#include <stdio.h>
#include <iostream>
#include <iomanip>

#include "opencv2/highgui/highgui.hpp"
#include "opencv2/core/core.hpp"
#include "opencv2/imgproc/imgproc.hpp"
#include "opencv2/video/background_segm.hpp"

using namespace std;
using namespace cv;

// Load frame from disk.
void readFrame(int frameNum, Mat &frame) {
    // Construct filenames
    Mat image;
    stringstream number, filename;

    number << setw(7) << setfill('0') << frameNum; // expecting over 1e10 images over the installation period.
    filename << "../images/store-" << number.str() << ".jpg"; // assumes jpegs!//
    cout << "Loading filename: " << filename.str() << endl;

    image = imread( filename.str() );

    if (image.empty() or !image.data) {
        cout << "Input image empty:\n";
    }

    frame = image.clone();
}

// Class to hold the perceptual chunks.
class percepUnit {
    
    public:
        cv::Mat image; // percept itself
        cv::Mat mask; // alpha channel
        
        // constructor method
        percepUnit(cv::Mat &ROI, cv::Mat &alpha, int ix, int iy, int iw, int ih, int area)  {
            image = ROI.clone();
            mask = alpha.clone();
        }
};

// Segment foreground from background
void segmentForeground(list<percepUnit> &percepUnitsForeground, Mat &foreground, Mat &frame) {
    Mat contourImage = Mat(foreground.rows, foreground.cols, CV_8UC1, Scalar::all(0));
    vector<vector<Point>> contours;
    int area;

    // The following causes strange spikes in memory usage:
    // find contours
    findContours(foreground, contours, CV_RETR_EXTERNAL, CV_CHAIN_APPROX_SIMPLE);

    for (int idx = 0; idx < contours.size(); idx++) {

        area = contourArea(contours[idx]);

        if (area > 100) {

            percepUnit thisUnit = percepUnit(frame, contourImage, 0, 0, 100,100, area);
            percepUnitsForeground.push_back(thisUnit); // Append to percepUnits
        }
    }

    /* The following does not:
    findContours(foreground, contours, CV_RETR_EXTERNAL, CV_CHAIN_APPROX_SIMPLE);

    for (int idx = 0; idx < contours.size(); idx++) {
        area = contourArea(contours[idx]);
    }*/

    /* Neither does this:
    for (int idx = 0; idx < 10; idx++) {
        percepUnit thisUnit = percepUnit(frame, contourImage, 0, 0, 100,100, area);
        percepUnitsForeground.push_back(thisUnit); // Append to percepUnits
    }*/
}

int main(int argc, const char** argv)
{
    int frameCount = 78298; 
    Mat frame, foreground;
    BackgroundSubtractorMOG2 MOG2model;
    list<percepUnit> scratchPercepUnitsForeground;

    // add rusage stuff
    struct rusage usage; // memory usage.

    for(int i=0; i<= 75; i++)
    {
        // run full segmenter here.  (background disabled)
        
        readFrame(frameCount, frame); // was frame = readFrame();

        // Only process if this frame actually loaded (non empty)
        if ( not frame.empty() ) {

            MOG2model(frame,foreground); // Update MOG2 model, downscale?

            // before we segment again clear scratch
            scratchPercepUnitsForeground.clear();
    
            // Segment the foreground regions and generate boolImage to extract from background.
            segmentForeground(scratchPercepUnitsForeground, foreground, frame);

        }

        frameCount++;

        getrusage(RUSAGE_SELF, &usage);
        cout << "DEBUG leakTest_bug_report " << i << " " << usage.ru_maxrss/1024.0 << endl;
    }

    return 0;
}

这是相应的 valgrind 输出：

==3562== Memcheck, a memory error detector
==3562== Copyright (C) 2002-2011, and GNU GPL'd, by Julian Seward et al.
==3562== Using Valgrind-3.7.0 and LibVEX; rerun with -h for copyright info
==3562== Command: ./leakTest
==3562== 
==3562== 
==3562== HEAP SUMMARY:
==3562==     in use at exit: 15,024 bytes in 7 blocks
==3562==   total heap usage: 795,556 allocs, 795,549 frees, 29,269,731,785 bytes allocated
==3562== 
==3562== 568 bytes in 1 blocks are still reachable in loss record 1 of 7
==3562==    at 0x4C2B6CD: malloc (in /usr/lib/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
==3562==    by 0x63A720A: __fopen_internal (iofopen.c:76)
==3562==    by 0xA8BC050: libjpeg_general_init (in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libjpeg.so.8.0.2)
==3562==    by 0x400F305: call_init.part.0 (dl-init.c:85)
==3562==    by 0x400F3DE: _dl_init (dl-init.c:52)
==3562==    by 0x40016E9: ??? (in /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/ld-2.15.so)
==3562== 
==3562== 2,072 bytes in 1 blocks are still reachable in loss record 2 of 7
==3562==    at 0x4C2B6CD: malloc (in /usr/lib/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
==3562==    by 0x1495F675: ??? (in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpixman-1.so.0.24.4)
==3562==    by 0x1495E4AE: ??? (in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpixman-1.so.0.24.4)
==3562==    by 0x14950888: ??? (in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpixman-1.so.0.24.4)
==3562==    by 0x149253B8: ??? (in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpixman-1.so.0.24.4)
==3562==    by 0x400F305: call_init.part.0 (dl-init.c:85)
==3562==    by 0x400F3DE: _dl_init (dl-init.c:52)
==3562==    by 0x40016E9: ??? (in /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/ld-2.15.so)
==3562== 
==3562== 2,072 bytes in 1 blocks are still reachable in loss record 3 of 7
==3562==    at 0x4C2B6CD: malloc (in /usr/lib/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
==3562==    by 0x1495F675: ??? (in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpixman-1.so.0.24.4)
==3562==    by 0x1495E0EF: ??? (in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpixman-1.so.0.24.4)
==3562==    by 0x14950890: ??? (in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpixman-1.so.0.24.4)
==3562==    by 0x149253B8: ??? (in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpixman-1.so.0.24.4)
==3562==    by 0x400F305: call_init.part.0 (dl-init.c:85)
==3562==    by 0x400F3DE: _dl_init (dl-init.c:52)
==3562==    by 0x40016E9: ??? (in /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/ld-2.15.so)
==3562== 
==3562== 2,072 bytes in 1 blocks are still reachable in loss record 4 of 7
==3562==    at 0x4C2B6CD: malloc (in /usr/lib/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
==3562==    by 0x1495F675: ??? (in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpixman-1.so.0.24.4)
==3562==    by 0x14971A6F: ??? (in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpixman-1.so.0.24.4)
==3562==    by 0x14950898: ??? (in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpixman-1.so.0.24.4)
==3562==    by 0x149253B8: ??? (in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpixman-1.so.0.24.4)
==3562==    by 0x400F305: call_init.part.0 (dl-init.c:85)
==3562==    by 0x400F3DE: _dl_init (dl-init.c:52)
==3562==    by 0x40016E9: ??? (in /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/ld-2.15.so)
==3562== 
==3562== 2,072 bytes in 1 blocks are still reachable in loss record 5 of 7
==3562==    at 0x4C2B6CD: malloc (in /usr/lib/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
==3562==    by 0x1495F675: ??? (in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpixman-1.so.0.24.4)
==3562==    by 0x1499024F: ??? (in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpixman-1.so.0.24.4)
==3562==    by 0x149508A0: ??? (in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpixman-1.so.0.24.4)
==3562==    by 0x149253B8: ??? (in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpixman-1.so.0.24.4)
==3562==    by 0x400F305: call_init.part.0 (dl-init.c:85)
==3562==    by 0x400F3DE: _dl_init (dl-init.c:52)
==3562==    by 0x40016E9: ??? (in /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/ld-2.15.so)
==3562== 
==3562== 2,072 bytes in 1 blocks are still reachable in loss record 6 of 7
==3562==    at 0x4C2B6CD: malloc (in /usr/lib/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
==3562==    by 0x1495F675: ??? (in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpixman-1.so.0.24.4)
==3562==    by 0x149610EF: ??? (in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpixman-1.so.0.24.4)
==3562==    by 0x149253B8: ??? (in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpixman-1.so.0.24.4)
==3562==    by 0x400F305: call_init.part.0 (dl-init.c:85)
==3562==    by 0x400F3DE: _dl_init (dl-init.c:52)
==3562==    by 0x40016E9: ??? (in /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/ld-2.15.so)
==3562== 
==3562== 4,096 bytes in 1 blocks are still reachable in loss record 7 of 7
==3562==    at 0x4C2B6CD: malloc (in /usr/lib/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
==3562==    by 0xA8BC067: libjpeg_general_init (in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libjpeg.so.8.0.2)
==3562==    by 0x400F305: call_init.part.0 (dl-init.c:85)
==3562==    by 0x400F3DE: _dl_init (dl-init.c:52)
==3562==    by 0x40016E9: ??? (in /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/ld-2.15.so)
==3562== 
==3562== LEAK SUMMARY:
==3562==    definitely lost: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
==3562==    indirectly lost: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
==3562==      possibly lost: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
==3562==    still reachable: 15,024 bytes in 7 blocks
==3562==         suppressed: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
==3562== 
==3562== For counts of detected and suppressed errors, rerun with: -v
==3562== ERROR SUMMARY: 0 errors from 0 contexts (suppressed: 2 from 2)

然而，内存仍然无法解释地增加：（与上图相比的整体增加是由于在 valgrind 中运行此测试。）

内存使用情况
（来源：ekran.org）

对于相同的代码，这里的地块输出：http ://www.ekran.org/tmp/massif.print.leak 未调用 findContours() 的非泄漏情况的地块输出，只有 percepUnit 构造函数：http ://www.ekran.org/tmp/massif.print.noLeak

编辑3

在跨线程（http://answers.opencv.org/question/19172/bug-increasing-memory-usage-per-iteration-when/）中建议我阅读 proc 而不是使用 rusage 方法，并且看看这个，内存并没有稳步增加：（！）

内存使用情况
（来源：ekran.org）

这确实与地块输出相似！！所以我想我需要重做所有的单元测试。有人有理由我不应该在这里放弃并考虑这个问题吗？

4

4 回答 4

4

您的 ptr-list 清理的 for 循环正在跳过项目，因为在循环体本身（调用percepIter++的返回值）中同时具有增量子句 () 和迭代器重新分配。erase()

换句话说，您将迭代器加倍，跳过每个偶数槽项。

我在下面标记了它：

        for (list<percepUnit*>::iterator percepIter = scratchPercepUnitsForeground.begin(); 
             percepIter != scratchPercepUnitsForeground.end();
             percepIter++) { // ADVANCES ITERATOR

            delete *percepIter; // delete what we point to.
            percepIter = scratchPercepUnitsForeground.erase(percepIter); // ADVANCES ITERATOR
        }

您可以通过多种方式解决此问题。例如，通过从 for 循环中删除增量表达式：

       for (list<percepUnit*>::iterator percepIter = scratchPercepUnitsForeground.begin(); 
             percepIter != scratchPercepUnitsForeground.end();) {

            delete *percepIter; // delete what we point to.
            percepIter = scratchPercepUnitsForeground.erase(percepIter);
        }

clear()同样，您可以简单地枚举列表，然后在释放所有指向的对象后调用 list方法。

       for (list<percepUnit*>::iterator percepIter = scratchPercepUnitsForeground.begin(); 
             percepIter != scratchPercepUnitsForeground.end();
             ++percepIter) 
        {
            delete *percepIter;
        }
        scratchPercepUnitsForeground.clear();

就个人而言，如果我必须选择其中一个，我更喜欢后者。除其他外，它更快，而且更易读。

但是如果我对此进行编码，我会使用智能指针，这将使它完全无关紧要，因为您可以简单地触发scratchPercepUnitsForeground.clear();并完成它。当列表内容被清除时，所有的智能指针析构函数都会触发，然后它们会为你删除它们的对象。这个概念被称为资源获取即初始化，或简称为 RAII，它只是意味着所有事物，包括动态分配，都具有基于范围的生命周期，并在范围退出时自动回收资源。你可以在这里阅读更多关于它的信息。

无论如何，这肯定是有泄漏的地方，而且从外观上看是一个很大的泄漏。

于 2013-08-21T00:20:14.237 回答
2

rusage对我来说，您的图形分析单调增加的事实是值得怀疑的。

国家的文件rusage：

使用的最大驻留集大小，以千字节为单位。即，进程同时使用的物理内存的最大千字节数。

由于您可能只收集多个图像的同一进程的统计信息，因此报告所有图像rusage的最大内存使用量的结论是有意义的。

事实上，使用不同的分析工具（OS X 上的仪器）会生成显示当前内存使用情况的图表：

内存分配

这与您使用的结果非常相似proc。我会得出结论，这rusage不是您想要的分析工具。

于 2013-08-22T17:26:57.503 回答
1

在谷歌搜索似乎是同样的问题后，我发现了这个问题（valgrind 报告“仍然可访问”的内存，回溯包括 _dl_init 和 libpixman-1）。我正在使用 Fedora 18 64 位。我设法用一个绝对最小的 C 可执行文件和 .so 库重现了这个问题...... C 程序只有一个返回 0 的 main 函数，而 .so 只有一个函数（从未实际调用过），它也立即退出0. 然而 valgrind 仍然报告 5 个未释放的块，总计 10,360 字节。我决定发布这个以防其他一些可怜的灵魂花了一个月的时间调试同样的问题！无论错误是什么，它似乎都不太可能是由可执行文件和库引起的，两者都不做任何事情。

于 2013-10-31T01:08:53.387 回答
0

On further investigation, the memory leak disappeared when I recompiled the executable and the.so file on Ubuntu 13.04 (GCC 4.7.3, compared to Fedora 18's GCC 4.7.2). I made no other changes so the problem definitely wasn't with my code. The fixed .so continued to be valgrind-perfect even after i transfered it back to the Fedora machine. I would suggest recompiling any/all shared objects you are using, with a newer version of gcc. As for the question of memory usage increasing over time, I don't know because my project is very small, allocates little memory and exits quickly.

于 2013-11-02T03:42:15.577 回答