qemu-devel.nongnu.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
To: Eiichi Tsukata <devel@etsukata.com>
Cc: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>,
	"qemu-devel@nongnu.org" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
	"qemu-block@nongnu.org" <qemu-block@nongnu.org>,
	"mreitz@redhat.com" <mreitz@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block/backup: fix memory leak in bdrv_backup_top_append()
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2020 11:42:10 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200120104210.GC4970@linux.fritz.box> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9a335600-d9cc-bbed-7b2f-9d9d0174c7e7@etsukata.com>

Am 23.12.2019 um 14:40 hat Eiichi Tsukata geschrieben:
> 
> 
> On 2019/12/23 21:40, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
> > 23.12.2019 12:06, Eiichi Tsukata wrote:
> >> bdrv_open_driver() allocates bs->opaque according to drv->instance_size.
> >> There is no need to allocate it and overwrite opaque in
> >> bdrv_backup_top_append().
> >>
> >> Reproducer:
> >>
> >>    $ QTEST_QEMU_BINARY=./x86_64-softmmu/qemu-system-x86_64 valgrind -q --leak-check=full tests/test-replication -p /replication/secondary/start
> >>    ==29792== 24 bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 52 of 226
> >>    ==29792==    at 0x483AB1A: calloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:762)
> >>    ==29792==    by 0x4B07CE0: g_malloc0 (in /usr/lib64/libglib-2.0.so.0.6000.7)
> >>    ==29792==    by 0x12BAB9: bdrv_open_driver (block.c:1289)
> >>    ==29792==    by 0x12BEA9: bdrv_new_open_driver (block.c:1359)
> >>    ==29792==    by 0x1D15CB: bdrv_backup_top_append (backup-top.c:190)
> >>    ==29792==    by 0x1CC11A: backup_job_create (backup.c:439)
> >>    ==29792==    by 0x1CD542: replication_start (replication.c:544)
> >>    ==29792==    by 0x1401B9: replication_start_all (replication.c:52)
> >>    ==29792==    by 0x128B50: test_secondary_start (test-replication.c:427)
> >>    ...
> >>
> >> Fixes: 7df7868b9640 ("block: introduce backup-top filter driver")
> >> Signed-off-by: Eiichi Tsukata <devel@etsukata.com>
> >> ---
> >>   block/backup-top.c | 2 +-
> >>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/block/backup-top.c b/block/backup-top.c
> >> index 7cdb1f8eba..617217374d 100644
> >> --- a/block/backup-top.c
> >> +++ b/block/backup-top.c
> >> @@ -196,7 +196,7 @@ BlockDriverState *bdrv_backup_top_append(BlockDriverState *source,
> >>       }
> >>   
> >>       top->total_sectors = source->total_sectors;
> >> -    top->opaque = state = g_new0(BDRVBackupTopState, 1);
> >> +    state = top->opaque;
> >>   
> >>       bdrv_ref(target);
> >>       state->target = bdrv_attach_child(top, target, "target", &child_file, errp);
> >>
> > 
> > Reviewed-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
> > 
> > Hmm, it was not my idea, I just copied it from mirror.. And there should be the same leak. and
> > may be in other places:
> > 
> > # git grep 'opaque =.*g_new'
> > block/backup-top.c:    top->opaque = state = g_new0(BDRVBackupTopState, 1);

Fixed by this patch.

> > block/file-posix.c:    state->opaque = g_new0(BDRVRawReopenState, 1);
> > block/gluster.c:    state->opaque = g_new0(BDRVGlusterReopenState, 1);
> > block/raw-format.c:    reopen_state->opaque = g_new0(BDRVRawState, 1);
> > block/sheepdog.c:    re_s = state->opaque = g_new0(BDRVSheepdogReopenState, 1);

Doing this for reopen state is fine.

> > block/iscsi.c:    bs->opaque = g_new0(struct IscsiLun, 1);

This one looks kind of questionable. It basically builds its
BlockDriveState manually without using any of the block layer open
functions.

> > block/mirror.c:    bs_opaque = g_new0(MirrorBDSOpaque, 1);

Harmless as Eiichi explained below, but not nice either.

> Thanks for reviewing.
> As you say, block/mirror.c has similar code. But it does not cause the leak.
> The difference is bdrv_mirror_top BlockDriver does not have .instance_size
> whereas bdrv_backup_top_filter BlockDriver has .instance_size = sizeof(BDRVBackupTopState).
> So when bdrv_open_driver() is called from mirror.c, g_malloc0(0) is
> called allocating nothing.

I think it should still be changed just because it would make the code
cleaner. It's always better to use common infrastructure than
reimplementing it locally.

Kevin



  reply	other threads:[~2020-01-20 11:08 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-12-23  9:06 [PATCH] block/backup: fix memory leak in bdrv_backup_top_append() Eiichi Tsukata
2019-12-23 12:40 ` Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy
2019-12-23 13:40   ` Eiichi Tsukata
2020-01-20 10:42     ` Kevin Wolf [this message]
2020-01-18  8:26 ` Eiichi Tsukata
2020-01-20 10:32 ` Kevin Wolf

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20200120104210.GC4970@linux.fritz.box \
    --to=kwolf@redhat.com \
    --cc=devel@etsukata.com \
    --cc=mreitz@redhat.com \
    --cc=qemu-block@nongnu.org \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    --cc=vsementsov@virtuozzo.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).