[Ace-users] [TAO]: AMI+DSI+AMH facility usage ...a few problems, and their fixes

[Venkat]

Hello TAO team,

  Following is the PRF details for the problem

    TAO VERSION: 1.6.1
    ACE VERSION: 5.6.1

    HOST MACHINE and OPERATING SYSTEM:
        amd64, NetBSD 3.1

    TARGET MACHINE and OPERATING SYSTEM, if different from HOST:
             same

   THE $ACE_ROOT/ace/config.h FILE [if you use a link to a platform-
specific file, simply state which one]:
                 config-netbsd.h

    THE $ACE_ROOT/include/makeinclude/platform_macros.GNU FILE :
      platform_netbsd.GNU

    CONTENTS OF $ACE_ROOT/bin/MakeProjectCreator/config/
default.features
              ssl=1

    AREA/CLASS/EXAMPLE AFFECTED:
            tao/DynamicInterface
            TAO/tests/DSI_AMH
            TAO/tests/DSI_AMI_Gateway

    DOES THE PROBLEM AFFECT:
       COMPILATION? No
       LINKING? No
       EXECUTION? Yes
       TAO and application are effected

    SYNOPSIS:
       Following problems are seen:
(1) Incorrect implementation of TAO_AMH_DSI_Response_Handler_var, and
other miscellaneous
(2)  Mostly Memory related problems - Several types of memory leaks
(3)  Incorrect usage of amh_response_handler_allocator() at
application (tests)

   DESCRIPTION:

        While verifying the DIS/AMI/AMH features via TAO/tests/
DSI_AMH, TAO/tests/DSI_AMI_Gateway, I came across several types of
problems related to memory management. I have not done exhaustive
tests, though - various exceptions generations. I notice several TODO
comments, so there probably is intent to evolve the code in future.

        With some changes I made, I am successful in running and
removing several memory leaks. Most of my testing at this time is
limited to "normal" behavior; that is, no exceptions are generated in
the gateway or passed through gateway. I would pursue this later.

        Unfortunately, I'm still seeing some memory leaks. I'm very
sure that there are no leaks - in the tests I've performed - in test
programs nor in the response and reply handlers. How could I say
that?

        I have taken 5.5.7/1.5.7 release, and ran the same tests with
the same changes I attached to this PRF. I ran the client for a few
thousands of iterations, and there is no process memory growth.
Without my fixes, I see lots of process growth.

        I notice changes in the guts of tao (/orb) between the
releases. It's too big a space to cover by me. I don't have any memory
leak too at this time for my platform!

     Any help in knowing/fixing the leaks is very appreciated.

    REPEAT BY:

    SAMPLE FIX/WORKAROUND:
        I've fixes, but I dont' see an option to attach to this post.
(somehow my direct post to tao-bugs is reflected. I subscribed to it.)

Thanks
Venkat