Re: dpdk address sanitizer

[Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>]

On Fri, 17 Jun 2022 07:45:33 +0200
David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com> wrote:

> Hello,
> 
> On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 6:08 AM Juan Pablo L.
> <jpablolorenzetti@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hello, I am new to dpdk ... i would like to trace memory usage and detect memory leaks, valgrind as well as address sanitizer (gcc) report some memory loss at application end. For the life of me, i cannot figure it out ... i just write a simple program that has the rte_eal_init + rte_eal_cleanup and i get the following error (also tried helloworld from examples, with same results):
> >
> > ==3399==ERROR: AddressSanitizer: stack-buffer-overflow on address 0x7f6ca3efb480 at pc 0x7f6ca7162b61 bp 0x7f6ca3efb450 sp 0x7f6ca3efac00
> > WRITE of size 24 at 0x7f6ca3efb480 thread T-1
> > #0 0x7f6ca7162b60 in __interceptor_sigaltstack.part.0 (/lib64/libasan.so.8+0x61b60)
> > #1 0x7f6ca71d9337 in __sanitizer::UnsetAlternateSignalStack() (/lib64/libasan.so.8+0xd8337)
> > #2 0x7f6ca71c90f4 in __asan::AsanThread::Destroy() (/lib64/libasan.so.8+0xc80f4)
> > #3 0x7f6ca679b000 in __GI___nptl_deallocate_tsd (/lib64/libc.so.6+0x8a000)
> > #4 0x7f6ca679dc9d in start_thread (/lib64/libc.so.6+0x8cc9d)
> > #5 0x7f6ca68235df in __GI___clone3 (/lib64/libc.so.6+0x1125df)
> >
> > Address 0x7f6ca3efb480 is a wild pointer inside of access range of size 0x000000000018.
> > SUMMARY: AddressSanitizer: stack-buffer-overflow (/lib64/libasan.so.8+0x61b60) in __interceptor_sigaltstack.part.0
> > Shadow bytes around the buggy address:
> > 0x0fee147d7640: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 f1 f1 f1 f1 00 00 00 00
> > 0x0fee147d7650: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 06 f2 f2 f2 f2 00 00
> > 0x0fee147d7660: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> > 0x0fee147d7670: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> > 0x0fee147d7680: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 04 f3 f3 f3 f3  
> > =>0x0fee147d7690:[f3]f3 f3 f3 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  
> > 0x0fee147d76a0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> > 0x0fee147d76b0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> > 0x0fee147d76c0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> > 0x0fee147d76d0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> > 0x0fee147d76e0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> > Shadow byte legend (one shadow byte represents 8 application bytes):
> > Addressable: 00
> > Partially addressable: 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
> > Heap left redzone: fa
> > Freed heap region: fd
> > Stack left redzone: f1
> > Stack mid redzone: f2
> > Stack right redzone: f3
> > Stack after return: f5
> > Stack use after scope: f8
> > Global redzone: f9
> > Global init order: f6
> > Poisoned by user: f7
> > Container overflow: fc
> > Array cookie: ac
> > Intra object redzone: bb
> > ASan internal: fe
> > Left alloca redzone: ca
> > Right alloca redzone: cb
> > ==3399==ABORTING
> >
> > I am not sure what I m doing wrong but it is very frustrating. On top of that, I try other scenarios and see if I can just "ignore" that and still detect other memory leaks but it does not work. I get memory from rte_malloc and don't free it and I still get the above report only, I do not get any report from the memory I leaked intentionally ... no difference what so ever .... I tried the same with the helloworld example and I get the same results ....  
> 
> I experienced the same issue recently on Fedora 36.
> I did not investigate.
> 
> I think I waived this warning, by setting
> ASAN_OPTIONS="use_sigaltstack=0" in the environment.
> HTH.
> 

Looks like the alternate signal stack allocated inside address sanitizer is not big enough.