[libvirt] Found mem leak in libvirtd, need help to debug
piotr.rybicki at innervision.pl
Thu Feb 11 15:15:55 UTC 2016
>>> I still think these are libgfapi leaks; All the definitely lost bytes
>>> come from the library.
>>> ==6532== 3,064 (96 direct, 2,968 indirect) bytes in 1 blocks are
>>> definitely lost in loss record 1,106 of 1,142
>>> ==6532== at 0x4C2C0D0: calloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:711)
>>> ==6532== by 0x10701279: __gf_calloc (mem-pool.c:117)
>>> ==6532== by 0x106CC541: xlator_dynload (xlator.c:259)
>>> ==6532== by 0xFC4E947: create_master (glfs.c:202)
>>> ==6532== by 0xFC4E947: glfs_init_common (glfs.c:863)
>>> ==6532== by 0xFC4EB50: glfs_init@@GFAPI_3.4.0 (glfs.c:916)
>>> ==6532== by 0xF7E4A33: virStorageFileBackendGlusterInit
>>> ==6532== by 0xF7D56DE: virStorageFileInitAs (storage_driver.c:2788)
>>> ==6532== by 0xF7D5E39: virStorageFileGetMetadataRecurse
>>> ==6532== by 0xF7D6295: virStorageFileGetMetadata
>>> ==6532== by 0x1126A2B0: qemuDomainDetermineDiskChain
>>> ==6532== by 0x11269AE6: qemuDomainCheckDiskPresence
>>> ==6532== by 0x11292055: qemuProcessLaunch (qemu_process.c:4708)
>>> Care to reporting it to them?
>> Of course - i will.
>> But, are You sure there is no need to call glfs_fini() after qemu
>> process is launched? Are all of those resources still needed in libvirt?
>> I understand, that libvirt needs to check presence / other-things of
>> storage, but after qemu is launched?
> We call glfs_fini(). And that's the problem. It does not free everything
> that glfs_init() allocated. Hence the leaks. Actually every time we call
> glfs_init() we print a debug message from
> virStorageFileBackendGlusterInit() which wraps it. And then another
> debug message from virStorageFileBackendGlusterDeinit() when we call
> glfs_fini(). So if you set up debug logs, you can check whether our init
> and finish calls match.
Thanks Michal, You are right.
Leak still exists in newest gluster 3.7.8
There is even simpler case to see this memleak. valgrind on:
qemu-img info gluster://SERVER_IP:0/pool/FILE.img
==6100== LEAK SUMMARY:
==6100== definitely lost: 19,846 bytes in 98 blocks
==6100== indirectly lost: 2,479,205 bytes in 182 blocks
==6100== possibly lost: 240,600 bytes in 7 blocks
==6100== still reachable: 3,271,130 bytes in 2,931 blocks
==6100== suppressed: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
So it's definitely gluster fault.
I've just reported it on gluster-devel@
More information about the libvir-list