Github user dain commented on a diff in the pull request:

    https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/pull/669#discussion_r225332620
  
    --- Diff: 
zookeeper-common/src/test/java/org/apache/zookeeper/common/TestByteBufAllocator.java
 ---
    @@ -0,0 +1,145 @@
    +/*
    + * Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one
    + * or more contributor license agreements.  See the NOTICE file
    + * distributed with this work for additional information
    + * regarding copyright ownership.  The ASF licenses this file
    + * to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the
    + * "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance
    + * with the License.  You may obtain a copy of the License at
    + *
    + *     http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
    + *
    + * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
    + * distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
    + * WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
    + * See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
    + * limitations under the License.
    + */
    +
    +package org.apache.zookeeper.common;
    +
    +import io.netty.buffer.ByteBuf;
    +import io.netty.buffer.CompositeByteBuf;
    +import io.netty.buffer.PooledByteBufAllocator;
    +import io.netty.util.ResourceLeakDetector;
    +
    +import java.util.ArrayList;
    +import java.util.List;
    +import java.util.concurrent.atomic.AtomicReference;
    +
    +/**
    + * This is a custom ByteBufAllocator that tracks outstanding allocations 
and
    + * crashes the program if any of them are leaked.
    + *
    + * Never use this class in production, it will cause your server to run out
    + * of memory! This is because it holds strong references to all allocated
    + * buffers and doesn't release them until checkForLeaks() is called at the
    + * end of a unit test.
    + *
    + * Note: the original code was copied from 
https://github.com/airlift/drift,
    + * with the permission and encouragement of airlift's author (dain). 
Airlift
    + * uses the same apache 2.0 license as Zookeeper so this should be ok.
    + *
    + * However, the code was modified to take advantage of Netty's built-in
    + * leak tracking and make a best effort to print details about buffer 
leaks.
    + */
    +public class TestByteBufAllocator extends PooledByteBufAllocator {
    +    private static AtomicReference<TestByteBufAllocator> INSTANCE =
    +            new AtomicReference<>(null);
    +
    +    /**
    +     * Get the singleton testing allocator.
    +     * @return the singleton allocator, creating it if one does not exist.
    +     */
    +    public static TestByteBufAllocator getInstance() {
    +        TestByteBufAllocator result = INSTANCE.get();
    +        if (result == null) {
    +            // Note: the leak detector level never gets reset after this,
    +            // but that's probably ok since this is only used by test code.
    +            
ResourceLeakDetector.setLevel(ResourceLeakDetector.Level.PARANOID);
    +            INSTANCE.compareAndSet(null, new TestByteBufAllocator());
    +            result = INSTANCE.get();
    +        }
    +        return result;
    +    }
    +
    +    /**
    +     * Destroys the singleton testing allocator and throws an error if any 
of the
    +     * buffers allocated by it have been leaked. Attempts to print leak 
details to
    +     * standard error before throwing, by using netty's built-in leak 
tracking.
    +     * Note that this might not always work, since it only triggers when a 
buffer
    +     * is garbage-collected and calling System.gc() does not guarantee 
that a buffer
    +     * will actually be GC'ed.
    +     *
    +     * This should be called at the end of a unit test's tearDown() method.
    +     */
    +    public static void checkForLeaks() {
    +        TestByteBufAllocator result = INSTANCE.getAndSet(null);
    +        if (result != null) {
    +            result.checkInstanceForLeaks();
    +        }
    +
    +    }
    +
    +    private final List<ByteBuf> trackedBuffers = new ArrayList<>();
    +
    +    public TestByteBufAllocator()
    +    {
    +        super(false);
    +    }
    +
    +    @Override
    +    protected ByteBuf newHeapBuffer(int initialCapacity, int maxCapacity)
    +    {
    +        return track(super.newHeapBuffer(initialCapacity, maxCapacity));
    +    }
    +
    +    @Override
    +    protected ByteBuf newDirectBuffer(int initialCapacity, int maxCapacity)
    +    {
    +        return track(super.newDirectBuffer(initialCapacity, maxCapacity));
    +    }
    +
    +    @Override
    +    public CompositeByteBuf compositeHeapBuffer(int maxNumComponents)
    +    {
    +        return track(super.compositeHeapBuffer(maxNumComponents));
    +    }
    +
    +    @Override
    +    public CompositeByteBuf compositeDirectBuffer(int maxNumComponents)
    +    {
    +        return track(super.compositeDirectBuffer(maxNumComponents));
    +    }
    +
    +    private synchronized CompositeByteBuf track(CompositeByteBuf byteBuf)
    +    {
    +        trackedBuffers.add(byteBuf);
    +        return byteBuf;
    +    }
    +
    +    private synchronized ByteBuf track(ByteBuf byteBuf)
    +    {
    +        trackedBuffers.add(byteBuf);
    +        return byteBuf;
    +    }
    +
    +    private void checkInstanceForLeaks()
    +    {
    +        long referencedBuffersCount = 0;
    +        synchronized (this) {
    +            referencedBuffersCount = trackedBuffers.stream()
    +                    .filter(byteBuf -> byteBuf.refCnt() > 0)
    +                    .count();
    +            // Make tracked buffers eligible for GC
    +            trackedBuffers.clear();
    +        }
    +        // Trigger a GC. This will hopefully (but not necessarily) print 
details
    +        // about detected leaks to standard error before the error is 
thrown.
    +        System.gc();
    --- End diff --
    
    I think you want this inside of the if statement below, since it is only 
needed if there is a leak.


---

Reply via email to