Bug 1008979 - possible memory leaks in libvirt detected
possible memory leaks in libvirt detected
Status: CLOSED NOTABUG
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6
Classification: Red Hat
Component: libvirt (Show other bugs)
6.5
Unspecified Unspecified
unspecified Severity unspecified
: rc
: ---
Assigned To: Libvirt Maintainers
Virtualization Bugs
:
Depends On:
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2013-09-17 08:35 EDT by Tomas Pelka
Modified: 2013-09-17 09:18 EDT (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2013-09-17 09:18:20 EDT
Type: Bug
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---


Attachments (Terms of Use)
valgrind output (98.55 KB, text/plain)
2013-09-17 08:36 EDT, Tomas Pelka
no flags Details

  None (edit)
Description Tomas Pelka 2013-09-17 08:35:48 EDT
Description of problem:
see attached vlagrind output

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
libvirt-0.10.2-24.el6

How reproducible:
100%

Steps to Reproduce:
1. valgrind --leak-check=full --show-reachable=yes -v --log-file=libvirt.leaks /usr/sbin/libvirtd
2.
3.

Actual results:
==17326== LEAK SUMMARY:
==17326==    definitely lost: 46 bytes in 2 blocks
==17326==    indirectly lost: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
==17326==      possibly lost: 88 bytes in 2 blocks
==17326==    still reachable: 149,774 bytes in 1,610 blocks
==17326==         suppressed: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
==17326== 
==17326== ERROR SUMMARY: 4 errors from 4 contexts (suppressed: 8 from 6)

Expected results:


Additional info:
Comment 1 Tomas Pelka 2013-09-17 08:36:25 EDT
Created attachment 798799 [details]
valgrind output
Comment 2 Jiri Denemark 2013-09-17 09:00:22 EDT
There are only 2 blocks of definitely lost memory:

==17371== 21 bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 19 of 127
==17371==    at 0x4A069EE: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:270)
==17371==    by 0x5C68744: PR_GetLibraryFilePathname (prlink.c:1346)
==17371==    by 0x5EE28E5: PR_GetLibraryFilePathname_stub (stubs.c:363)
==17371==    by 0x5EBE6A8: BLAPI_FIPSInstalled (shvfy.c:286)
==17371==    by 0x5EA970A: fips_startup_tests (fipstest.c:2175)
==17371==    by 0x5EE7FD5: ??? (in /lib64/libfreebl3.so)
==17371==    by 0x5E969DA: ??? (in /lib64/libfreebl3.so)

and

==17371== 25 bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 34 of 127
==17371==    at 0x4A069EE: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:270)
==17371==    by 0x5634A16: PORT_Alloc_Util (secport.c:78)
==17371==    by 0x5EBE612: mkCheckFileName (shvfy.c:231)
==17371==    by 0x5EBE6C7: BLAPI_FIPSInstalled (shvfy.c:293)
==17371==    by 0x5EA970A: fips_startup_tests (fipstest.c:2175)
==17371==    by 0x5EE7FD5: ??? (in /lib64/libfreebl3.so)
==17371==    by 0x5E969DA: ??? (in /lib64/libfreebl3.so)
Comment 3 Jiri Denemark 2013-09-17 09:18:20 EDT
The two possibly lost blocks are similar so there's no detected leak in libvirtd. Also libvirtd is a daemon that tends to initialize some data structures at startup and keep them forever so there's not much sense in reporting reachable memory blocks.

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.