From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Regression, bisected: reference leak with IPSec since ~2.6.31
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2010 22:17:33 +0200
Message-ID: <1285013853.2323.148.camel@edumazet-laptop>
References: <20100920174443.GA5515@elliptictech.com>
	 <1285006844.2323.17.camel@edumazet-laptop>
	 <20100920195256.GA14330@elliptictech.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
To: Nick Bowler <nbowler@elliptictech.com>
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <20100920195256.GA14330@elliptictech.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org

Le lundi 20 septembre 2010 =C3=A0 15:52 -0400, Nick Bowler a =C3=A9crit=
 :
> On 2010-09-20 20:20 +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > If you change your program to send small frames (so they are not
> > fragmented), is the problem still present ?
>=20
> I changed MAX_DGRAM_SIZE in the test program to 1000 (mtu on the
> interface is 1500).  The short answer is that the references are
> not leaked, and things seem to get cleaned up.  So the rest of this
> mail probably describes a separate issue.
>=20
> The long answer, however, is interesting: With latest Linus' git, the
> references are cleaned up much later than I would expect.  After runn=
ing
> the test program and flushing the SAD/SPD, the reference count is sti=
ll
> 1.  If I repeat the test immediately, the reference count will increa=
se
> further.  I can easily raise the reference count to, say, 100.  Now, =
if
> I wait a while (10 minutes or so), the reference count will still be
> 100.  However, when I run the setkey script after this delay, the
> reference count drops immediately to 1.  If I then flush the SAD/SPD,=
 it
> drops to 0.
>=20
> This behaviour is new: newer than the reported leak.  For example, wi=
th
> 2.6.34, everything works perfectly with MAX_DGRAM_SIZE set to 1000 (t=
he
> SAs are destroyed immediately when the SAD/SPD are flushed), but the
> leak occurs with MAX_DGRAM_SIZE set to 10000.
>=20

Thanks Nick

I suspect a skb->truesize bug somewhere.

I can see atomic_read(&sk->sk_wmem_alloc) becoming negative after a
while...

I am investigating and let you know.

Thanks