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.
Bug 975392 - libvirtd leaks iscsi portal string on iscsi pool start
Summary: libvirtd leaks iscsi portal string on iscsi pool start
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6
Classification: Red Hat
Component: libvirt
Version: 6.4
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: rc
: ---
Assignee: Ján Tomko
QA Contact: Virtualization Bugs
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2013-06-18 11:03 UTC by Ján Tomko
Modified: 2013-11-21 09:03 UTC (History)
7 users (show)

Fixed In Version: libvirt-0.10.2-19.el6
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2013-11-21 09:03:08 UTC
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Attachments (Terms of Use)


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Red Hat Product Errata RHBA-2013:1581 0 normal SHIPPED_LIVE libvirt bug fix and enhancement update 2013-11-21 01:11:35 UTC

Description Ján Tomko 2013-06-18 11:03:27 UTC 
Description of problem:
libvirtd leaks iscsi portal string on iscsi pool start, as shown by valgrind.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
libvirt-0.10.2-18.el6.x86_64

How reproducible:
100 %

Steps to Reproduce:
1. run libvirtd under valgrind
# valgrind --leak-check=full libvirtd
2. Start an iscsi pool:
# virsh pool-dumpxml iscsi
<pool type='iscsi'>
  <name>iscsi</name>
  <uuid>86ba4417-8db7-493b-a61a-c56fb3128333</uuid>
  <capacity unit='bytes'>0</capacity>
  <allocation unit='bytes'>0</allocation>
  <available unit='bytes'>0</available>
  <source>
    <host name='10.11.12.13'/>
    <device path='iqn.2004-04.fedora:fedora13:iscsi.test'/>
  </source>
  <target>
    <path>/dev/disk/by-path</path>
    <permissions>
      <mode>0755</mode>
      <owner>-1</owner>
      <group>-1</group>
    </permissions>
  </target>
</pool>

# virsh pool-start iscsi
Pool iscsi started

Actual results (after two pool-start/pool-destroy cycles):
Valgrind shows a memory leak in virStorageBackendISCSIStartPool:

==4289== 40 bytes in 2 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 380 of 649
==4289==    at 0x4A069EE: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:270)
==4289==    by 0x3AED701EF7: __vasprintf_chk (vasprintf_chk.c:82)
==4289==    by 0x31A4C64EB3: virVasprintf (stdio2.h:199)
==4289==    by 0x31A4C64F57: virAsprintf (util.c:2001)
==4289==    by 0x4E2AC9: virStorageBackendISCSIPortal (storage_backend_iscsi.c:109)
==4289==    by 0x4E2CEC: virStorageBackendISCSIStartPool (storage_backend_iscsi.c:718)
==4289==    by 0x4D67F8: storagePoolStart (storage_driver.c:702)
==4289==    by 0x31A4CDD757: virStoragePoolCreate (libvirt.c:12466)
==4289==    by 0x439544: remoteDispatchStoragePoolCreateHelper (remote_dispatch.h:11561)
==4289==    by 0x31A4D3F161: virNetServerProgramDispatch (virnetserverprogram.c:431)
==4289==    by 0x31A4D3FDFD: virNetServerProcessMsg (virnetserver.c:170)
==4289==    by 0x31A4D4049B: virNetServerHandleJob (virnetserver.c:191)


Expected results:
It doesn't.
Comment 1 Ján Tomko 2013-06-18 11:05:38 UTC 
Fixed upstream by:
commit 413274f63b8f2da3b1a4adfdf1cbc0df7a0e0316
Author:     Ján Tomko <jtomko>
AuthorDate: 2013-05-06 14:36:23 +0200
Commit:     Ján Tomko <jtomko>
CommitDate: 2013-05-09 14:25:11 +0200

    iscsi: don't leak portal string when starting a pool

git describe: v1.0.5-109-g413274f contains: v1.0.6-rc1~277

Posted downstream:
http://post-office.corp.redhat.com/archives/rhvirt-patches/2013-June/msg00308.html
Comment 7 zhenfeng wang 2013-07-09 10:29:33 UTC 
Verify this bug on libvirt-0.10.2-19.el6,the leak described in the bug has gone, however I found that there was some possibly leak existing, do we have necessary to pay attention about them ? thanks

1. run libvirtd under valgrind
# valgrind --leak-check=full libvirtd
2. Start an iscsi pool in another terminal
# virsh pool-start iscsi
Pool iscsi started

3.Quit the valgrind command (after two pool-start/pool-destroy cycles) ,I can got the following outputs
in the first terminal

4481== 48 bytes in 2 blocks are possibly lost in loss record 635 of 1,316
==4481==    at 0x4A0577B: calloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:593)
==4481==    by 0x3CCE615A0E: nl_addr_alloc (in /lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4481==    by 0x3CCE616157: nl_addr_build (in /lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4481==    by 0x3CCE620F8D: ??? (in /lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4481==    by 0x3CCE61795B: nl_cache_parse (in /lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4481==    by 0x3CCE61C181: nl_recvmsgs (in /lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4481==    by 0x3CCE617CB5: __cache_pickup (in /lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4481==    by 0x3CCE617E9B: nl_cache_pickup (in /lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4481==    by 0x3CCE620DE4: rtnl_addr_alloc_cache (in /lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4481==    by 0x3CB9608442: ??? (in /usr/lib64/libnetcf.so.1.4.0)
==4481==    by 0x3CB9606F9E: ??? (in /usr/lib64/libnetcf.so.1.4.0)
==4481==    by 0x4F2548: interfaceOpenInterface (interface_backend_netcf.c:141)
==4481== 
==4481== 104 bytes in 4 blocks are possibly lost in loss record 789 of 1,316
==4481==    at 0x4A0577B: calloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:593)
==4481==    by 0x3CCE615A0E: nl_addr_alloc (in /lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4481==    by 0x3CCE616157: nl_addr_build (in /lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4481==    by 0x3CCE6249CD: ??? (in /lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4481==    by 0x3CCE61795B: nl_cache_parse (in /lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4481==    by 0x3CCE61C181: nl_recvmsgs (in /lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4481==    by 0x3CCE617CB5: __cache_pickup (in /lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4481==    by 0x3CCE617E9B: nl_cache_pickup (in /lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4481==    by 0x3CCE623C24: rtnl_link_alloc_cache (in /lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4481==    by 0x3CB960842A: ??? (in /usr/lib64/libnetcf.so.1.4.0)
==4481==    by 0x3CB9606F9E: ??? (in /usr/lib64/libnetcf.so.1.4.0)
==4481==    by 0x4F2548: interfaceOpenInterface (interface_backend_netcf.c:141)
==4481== 
==4481== 104 bytes in 4 blocks are possibly lost in loss record 790 of 1,316
==4481==    at 0x4A0577B: calloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:593)
==4481==    by 0x3CCE615A0E: nl_addr_alloc (in /lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4481==    by 0x3CCE616157: nl_addr_build (in /lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4481==    by 0x3CCE624A05: ??? (in /lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4481==    by 0x3CCE61795B: nl_cache_parse (in /lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4481==    by 0x3CCE61C181: nl_recvmsgs (in /lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4481==    by 0x3CCE617CB5: __cache_pickup (in /lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4481==    by 0x3CCE617E9B: nl_cache_pickup (in /lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4481==    by 0x3CCE623C24: rtnl_link_alloc_cache (in /lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4481==    by 0x3CB960842A: ??? (in /usr/lib64/libnetcf.so.1.4.0)
==4481==    by 0x3CB9606F9E: ??? (in /usr/lib64/libnetcf.so.1.4.0)
==4481==    by 0x4F2548: interfaceOpenInterface (interface_backend_netcf.c:141)
==4481== 
==4481== 144 bytes in 5 blocks are possibly lost in loss record 871 of 1,316
==4481==    at 0x4A0577B: calloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:593)
==4481==    by 0x3CCE615A0E: nl_addr_alloc (in /lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4481==    by 0x3CCE616157: nl_addr_build (in /lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4481==    by 0x3CCE620F32: ??? (in /lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4481==    by 0x3CCE61795B: nl_cache_parse (in /lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4481==    by 0x3CCE61C181: nl_recvmsgs (in /lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4481==    by 0x3CCE617CB5: __cache_pickup (in /lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4481==    by 0x3CCE617E9B: nl_cache_pickup (in /lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4481==    by 0x3CCE620DE4: rtnl_addr_alloc_cache (in /lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4481==    by 0x3CB9608442: ??? (in /usr/lib64/libnetcf.so.1.4.0)
==4481==    by 0x3CB9606F9E: ??? (in /usr/lib64/libnetcf.so.1.4.0)
==4481==    by 0x4F2548: interfaceOpenInterface (interface_backend_netcf.c:141)
==4481== 
==4481== 720 bytes in 5 blocks are possibly lost in loss record 1,141 of 1,316
==4481==    at 0x4A0577B: calloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:593)
==4481==    by 0x3CCE61CEA0: nl_object_alloc (in /lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4481==    by 0x3CCE620E44: ??? (in /lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4481==    by 0x3CCE61795B: nl_cache_parse (in /lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4481==    by 0x3CCE61C181: nl_recvmsgs (in /lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4481==    by 0x3CCE617CB5: __cache_pickup (in /lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4481==    by 0x3CCE617E9B: nl_cache_pickup (in /lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4481==    by 0x3CCE620DE4: rtnl_addr_alloc_cache (in /lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4481==    by 0x3CB9608442: ??? (in /usr/lib64/libnetcf.so.1.4.0)
==4481==    by 0x3CB9606F9E: ??? (in /usr/lib64/libnetcf.so.1.4.0)
==4481==    by 0x4F2548: interfaceOpenInterface (interface_backend_netcf.c:141)
==4481==    by 0x4F0C6CC: do_open (libvirt.c:1212)
==4481== 
==4481== 1,600 bytes in 4 blocks are possibly lost in loss record 1,200 of 1,316
==4481==    at 0x4A0577B: calloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:593)
==4481==    by 0x3CCE61CEA0: nl_object_alloc (in /lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4481==    by 0x3CCE624817: ??? (in /lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4481==    by 0x3CCE61795B: nl_cache_parse (in /lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4481==    by 0x3CCE61C181: nl_recvmsgs (in /lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4481==    by 0x3CCE617CB5: __cache_pickup (in /lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4481==    by 0x3CCE617E9B: nl_cache_pickup (in /lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4481==    by 0x3CCE623C24: rtnl_link_alloc_cache (in /lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4481==    by 0x3CB960842A: ??? (in /usr/lib64/libnetcf.so.1.4.0)
==4481==    by 0x3CB9606F9E: ??? (in /usr/lib64/libnetcf.so.1.4.0)
==4481==    by 0x4F2548: interfaceOpenInterface (interface_backend_netcf.c:141)
==4481==    by 0x4F0C6CC: do_open (libvirt.c:1212)
==4481== 
==4481== 1,840 bytes in 5 blocks are possibly lost in loss record 1,205 of 1,316
==4481==    at 0x4A0577B: calloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:593)
==4481==    by 0x3CB7E11812: _dl_allocate_tls (in /lib64/ld-2.12.so)
==4481==    by 0x3CB8A07068: pthread_create@@GLIBC_2.2.5 (in /lib64/libpthread-2.12.so)
==4481==    by 0x4E7FF50: virThreadCreate (threads-pthread.c:188)
==4481==    by 0x4E808B3: virThreadPoolNew (threadpool.c:203)
==4481==    by 0x4F5E199: virNetServerNew (virnetserver.c:376)
==4481==    by 0x423396: main (libvirtd.c:1088)
==4481== 
==4481== 1,840 bytes in 5 blocks are possibly lost in loss record 1,206 of 1,316
==4481==    at 0x4A0577B: calloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:593)
==4481==    by 0x3CB7E11812: _dl_allocate_tls (in /lib64/ld-2.12.so)
==4481==    by 0x3CB8A07068: pthread_create@@GLIBC_2.2.5 (in /lib64/libpthread-2.12.so)
==4481==    by 0x4E7FF50: virThreadCreate (threads-pthread.c:188)
==4481==    by 0x4E8099A: virThreadPoolNew (threadpool.c:227)
==4481==    by 0x4F5E199: virNetServerNew (virnetserver.c:376)
==4481==    by 0x423396: main (libvirtd.c:1088)


Also I can reproduce this bug on libvirt-0.10.2-18.el6.x86_64

1.Quit the valgrind command (after two pool-start/pool-destroy cycles) ,I can got the following outputs
40 bytes in 2 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 401 of 685
==4845==    at 0x4A069EE: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:270)
==4845==    by 0x3CB8701EF7: __vasprintf_chk (in /lib64/libc-2.12.so)
==4845==    by 0x4E81EB3: virVasprintf (stdio2.h:199)
==4845==    by 0x4E81F57: virAsprintf (util.c:2001)
==4845==    by 0x4E2AC9: virStorageBackendISCSIPortal (storage_backend_iscsi.c:109)
==4845==    by 0x4E2CEC: virStorageBackendISCSIStartPool (storage_backend_iscsi.c:718)
==4845==    by 0x4D67F8: storagePoolStart (storage_driver.c:702)
==4845==    by 0x4EFA757: virStoragePoolCreate (libvirt.c:12466)
==4845==    by 0x439544: remoteDispatchStoragePoolCreateHelper (remote_dispatch.h:11561)
==4845==    by 0x4F5C161: virNetServerProgramDispatch (virnetserverprogram.c:431)
==4845==    by 0x4F5CDFD: virNetServerProcessMsg (virnetserver.c:170)
==4845==    by 0x4F5D49B: virNetServerHandleJob (virnetserver.c:191)
Comment 8 Ján Tomko 2013-07-10 13:43:30 UTC 
None of the leaks seem significant to me and yes, it should be present in libvirt-0.10.2-18.el6.x86_64.
Comment 9 zhenfeng wang 2013-07-11 02:33:30 UTC 
According to the comment8,mark this bug verified
Comment 11 errata-xmlrpc 2013-11-21 09:03:08 UTC 
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/RHBA-2013-1581.html
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.