Note: This bug is displayed in read-only format because
the product is no longer active in Red Hat Bugzilla.
RHEL Engineering is moving the tracking of its product development work on RHEL 6 through RHEL 9 to Red Hat Jira (issues.redhat.com). If you're a Red Hat customer, please continue to file support cases via the Red Hat customer portal. If you're not, please head to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira and file new tickets here. Individual Bugzilla bugs in the statuses "NEW", "ASSIGNED", and "POST" are being migrated throughout September 2023. Bugs of Red Hat partners with an assigned Engineering Partner Manager (EPM) are migrated in late September as per pre-agreed dates. Bugs against components "kernel", "kernel-rt", and "kpatch" are only migrated if still in "NEW" or "ASSIGNED". If you cannot log in to RH Jira, please consult article #7032570. That failing, please send an e-mail to the RH Jira admins at rh-issues@redhat.com to troubleshoot your issue as a user management inquiry. The email creates a ServiceNow ticket with Red Hat. Individual Bugzilla bugs that are migrated will be moved to status "CLOSED", resolution "MIGRATED", and set with "MigratedToJIRA" in "Keywords". The link to the successor Jira issue will be found under "Links", have a little "two-footprint" icon next to it, and direct you to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira (issue links are of type "https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-XXXX", where "X" is a digit). This same link will be available in a blue banner at the top of the page informing you that that bug has been migrated.
Description of problem:
Plug memory leak on cmdBlkdeviotune() sucessful path.
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
libvirt-0.9.8-0rc2.el6.x86_64
How reproducible:
always
Steps to Reproduce:
1. valgrind -v --leak-check=full virsh blkdeviotune <domain name> <block device>
Note: for instance, you have a guest 'demo' with 'hda' disk, and your guest may be 'shut off' state, then run 'valgrind -v --leak-check=full virsh blkdeviotune demo hda'
Actual results:
==12759== 576 bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 18 of 29
==12759== at 0x4A04A28: calloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:467)
==12759== by 0x42134E: _vshCalloc.clone.2 (virsh.c:422)
==12759== by 0x4217CB: cmdBlkdeviotune (virsh.c:6364)
==12759== by 0x4136A2: vshCommandRun (virsh.c:16363)
==12759== by 0x4253FB: main (virsh.c:17865)
==12759==
==12759== LEAK SUMMARY:
==12759== definitely lost: 576 bytes in 1 blocks
==12759== indirectly lost: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
==12759== possibly lost: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
==12759== still reachable: 126,964 bytes in 1,342 blocks
==12759== suppressed: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
Expected results:
avoid memory leak.
Additional info:
Patch has been ACKed and pushed on upstream, but need a devel_ack+.
commit ecf75f83dc5f83b43d24695e1323446137b68770
Author: Alex Jia <ajia>
Date: Thu Dec 8 14:09:56 2011 +0800
virsh: plug memory leak on cmdBlkdeviotune() sucessful path
Detected by valgrind. Leak introduced in commit e9bd9a0:
* tools/virsh.c: fix memory leak on cmdBlkdeviotune.
* how to reproduce?
% valgrind -v --leak-check=full virsh blkdeviotune <domain name> <block device>
* actual valgrind result:
==12759== 576 bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 18 of 29
==12759== at 0x4A04A28: calloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:467)
==12759== by 0x42134E: _vshCalloc.clone.2 (virsh.c:422)
==12759== by 0x4217CB: cmdBlkdeviotune (virsh.c:6364)
==12759== by 0x4136A2: vshCommandRun (virsh.c:16363)
==12759== by 0x4253FB: main (virsh.c:17865)
==12759==
==12759== LEAK SUMMARY:
==12759== definitely lost: 576 bytes in 1 blocks
==12759== indirectly lost: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
==12759== possibly lost: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
==12759== still reachable: 126,964 bytes in 1,342 blocks
==12759== suppressed: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.
For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.
If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.
http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2012-0748.html