Note: This bug is displayed in read-only format because the product is no longer active in Red Hat Bugzilla.

Bug 1139598

Summary:	The memories are exhausted quickly when handle the message which has multi fragments in a single record
Product:	[Community] GlusterFS	Reporter:	Gu Feng <flygoast>
Component:	rpc	Assignee:	Gu Feng <flygoast>
Status:	CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE	QA Contact:
Severity:	low	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	mainline	CC:	bugs, gluster-bugs, jacke406, ndevos
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:	glusterfs-3.7.0	Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:	1136221
Clones:	1146470 (view as bug list)		Environment:
Last Closed:	2015-05-14 17:27:34 UTC	Type:	Bug
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:
Bug Blocks:	1136221, 1146200, 1146466, 1146470, 1152900

Description Gu Feng 2014-09-09 09:50:54 UTC

+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #1136221 +++

Description of problem:
    We construct some rpc messages and send it to the IP and port which glusterfsd listens, the memory usage goes up quickly until exhausted

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
    3.3.0, 3.4.1, 3.5.0


Steps to Reproduce:
1. Start glusterfs services, and get the IP and port that one glusterfsd process listens

2. Run the attachement python script, which connects the IP and port and send four bytes 00 00 00 00 to the glusterfsd process

3. Watch the memory usage of the glusterfsd process. It will grow up quickly

Actual results:
   Memory of the glusterfsd process grows up quickly till exhausted

Expected results:
   Glusterfsd just ignores the messages


Additional info:
   The bug seems in __socket_proto_state_machine, which goes into an infinite loop to malloc memories when handle the special message. The special message is "multi fragments in a single record", and some values are not reset when handle next fragment.
  
   We tested below fix and it seems work:
          if (!RPC_LASTFRAG (in->fraghdr)) {
 
+             in->pending_vector = in->vector;
+             in->pending_vector->iov_base =  &in->fraghdr;
+             in->pending_vector->iov_len  = sizeof (in->fraghdr);
              in->record_state = SP_STATE_READING_FRAGHDR;
              break;
           }

--- Additional comment from jiangkai on 2014-09-04 06:35:44 EDT ---

More issues than imaging to handle the "multi fragments in a single record" message. The proposal is to refuse it:


 if (!RPC_LASTFRAG (in->fraghdr)) {
       gf_log (this->name, GF_LOG_ERROR, "multiple fragments per record not supported now");
       ret = -1;
       goto out;
 }

--- Additional comment from jiangkai on 2014-09-05 04:45:08 EDT ---

It happens after 3.4;  
3.3.1 reports error messages.

It seems imported by the change id Icd9f256bb2fd8c6266a7abefdff16936b4f8922d to support SSL

--- Additional comment from Anand Avati on 2014-09-09 04:30:12 EDT ---

REVIEW: http://review.gluster.org/8662 (socket: Fixed parsing RPC records containing multi fragments) posted (#1) for review on master by Gu Feng (flygoast)

Comment 1 Anand Avati 2014-09-09 10:03:17 UTC

REVIEW: http://review.gluster.org/8662 (socket: Fixed parsing RPC records containing multi fragments) posted (#2) for review on master by Gu Feng (flygoast)

Comment 2 Anand Avati 2014-09-13 16:27:24 UTC

REVIEW: http://review.gluster.org/8662 (socket: Fixed parsing RPC records containing multi fragments) posted (#3) for review on master by Gu Feng (flygoast)

Comment 3 Anand Avati 2014-09-19 12:37:09 UTC

COMMIT: http://review.gluster.org/8662 committed in master by Raghavendra G (rgowdapp) 
------
commit fb6702b7f8ba19333b7ba4af543d908e3f5e1923
Author: Gu Feng <flygoast>
Date:   Tue Sep 9 18:00:22 2014 +0800

    socket: Fixed parsing RPC records containing multi fragments
    
    In __socket_proto_state_machine(), when parsing RPC records containing
    multi fragments, just change the state of parsing process, had not
    processed the memory to coalesce the multi fragments.
    
    Change-Id: I5583e578603bd7290814a5d26885b31759c73115
    BUG: 1139598
    Signed-off-by: Gu Feng <flygoast>
    Reviewed-on: http://review.gluster.org/8662
    Tested-by: Gluster Build System <jenkins.com>
    Reviewed-by: Niels de Vos <ndevos>
    Reviewed-by: Raghavendra G <rgowdapp>
    Tested-by: Raghavendra G <rgowdapp>

Comment 4 Niels de Vos 2015-05-14 17:27:34 UTC

This bug is getting closed because a release has been made available that should address the reported issue. In case the problem is still not fixed with glusterfs-3.7.0, please open a new bug report.

glusterfs-3.7.0 has been announced on the Gluster mailinglists [1], packages for several distributions should become available in the near future. Keep an eye on the Gluster Users mailinglist [2] and the update infrastructure for your distribution.

[1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.gluster.devel/10939
[2] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.gluster.user

Comment 5 Niels de Vos 2015-05-14 17:35:35 UTC

This bug is getting closed because a release has been made available that should address the reported issue. In case the problem is still not fixed with glusterfs-3.7.0, please open a new bug report.

glusterfs-3.7.0 has been announced on the Gluster mailinglists [1], packages for several distributions should become available in the near future. Keep an eye on the Gluster Users mailinglist [2] and the update infrastructure for your distribution.

[1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.gluster.devel/10939
[2] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.gluster.user

Comment 6 Niels de Vos 2015-05-14 17:37:57 UTC

This bug is getting closed because a release has been made available that should address the reported issue. In case the problem is still not fixed with glusterfs-3.7.0, please open a new bug report.

glusterfs-3.7.0 has been announced on the Gluster mailinglists [1], packages for several distributions should become available in the near future. Keep an eye on the Gluster Users mailinglist [2] and the update infrastructure for your distribution.

[1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.gluster.devel/10939
[2] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.gluster.user

Comment 7 Niels de Vos 2015-05-14 17:43:42 UTC

This bug is getting closed because a release has been made available that should address the reported issue. In case the problem is still not fixed with glusterfs-3.7.0, please open a new bug report.

glusterfs-3.7.0 has been announced on the Gluster mailinglists [1], packages for several distributions should become available in the near future. Keep an eye on the Gluster Users mailinglist [2] and the update infrastructure for your distribution.

[1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.gluster.devel/10939
[2] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.gluster.user