Hi! We discovered a memory leak in ovn-northd, which grows quickly, caused by
commit 7b56f69580e1f390d9c6753a2cb8f0dbfbb4c467 (dated Wed Feb 23 09:30:00 2022
+0000). We also found a fix for it. I am however not familiar with this code,
so when I looked a bit further, I wondered if a different variant would be
better. So here are three variants for consideration.
Here is the first variant which is the simplest change, and the one we actually
tested:
>From 491008b30fd2e7e09cc4cd3aab1d1a0a3f86dca7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Olaf Seibert <o.seib...@syseleven.de>
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2022 11:15:47 +0200
Subject: [PATCH ovn] Fix memory leak.
Commit 7b56f69580e1f390d9c6753a2cb8f0dbfbb4c467 populated ids with
names, but didn't clean them up. Do that here.
Signed-off-by: Olaf Seibert <o.seib...@syseleven.de>
---
northd/northd.c | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/northd/northd.c b/northd/northd.c
index 09eccf4d9..e7beed8fb 100644
--- a/northd/northd.c
+++ b/northd/northd.c
@@ -3438,6 +3438,7 @@ ovn_port_update_sbrec(struct northd_input *input_data,
struct smap ids = SMAP_INITIALIZER(&ids);
smap_clone(&ids, &op->nbrp->external_ids);
sbrec_port_binding_set_external_ids(op->sb, &ids);
+ smap_destroy(&ids);
sbrec_port_binding_set_nat_addresses(op->sb, NULL, 0);
} else {
--
2.37.2
I realised that the `ids` variable could possibly be removed, since these
external_ids are in effect just passed on unmodified to
sbrec_port_binding_set_external_ids(). But since I didn't find the source to
that, I am not totally sure that this is safe to do.
So variant 2 uses that shortcut:
>From 6472d24678d3af1d622bacf7da1c9ba77e058b10 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Olaf Seibert <o.seib...@syseleven.de>
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2022 11:17:12 +0200
Subject: [PATCH ovn] Fix memory leak.
Commit 7b56f69580e1f390d9c6753a2cb8f0dbfbb4c467 cloned the external_ids
to ids, then passed them to sbrec_port_binding_set_external_ids().
The intermediate step is unneeded (and caused a memory leak).
Pass the external_ids directly.
Signed-off-by: Olaf Seibert <o.seib...@syseleven.de>
---
northd/northd.c | 4 +---
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/northd/northd.c b/northd/northd.c
index 09eccf4d9..309b449dd 100644
--- a/northd/northd.c
+++ b/northd/northd.c
@@ -3435,9 +3435,7 @@ ovn_port_update_sbrec(struct northd_input *input_data,
sbrec_port_binding_set_mac(op->sb, &addresses, 1);
ds_destroy(&s);
- struct smap ids = SMAP_INITIALIZER(&ids);
- smap_clone(&ids, &op->nbrp->external_ids);
- sbrec_port_binding_set_external_ids(op->sb, &ids);
+ sbrec_port_binding_set_external_ids(op->sb, &op->nbrp->external_ids);
sbrec_port_binding_set_nat_addresses(op->sb, NULL, 0);
} else {
--
2.37.2
Then, further down in northd.c, there is another use of
sbrec_port_binding_set_nat_addresses(). But in that location, there is a
manipulation of the names. Maybe the same is needed here. On the other hand,
there the source of the ids is op->nbsp instead of op->nbrp here.
So I'm not sure if it has to be the same.
Variant 3:
>From 4a61a02009eb450c6dfadd156968023833e4f1a6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Olaf Seibert <o.seib...@syseleven.de>
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2022 11:33:23 +0200
Subject: [PATCH ovn] Fix a memory leak.
Commit 7b56f69580e1f390d9c6753a2cb8f0dbfbb4c467 added another place
where external_ids are copied to the SB database. This had a memory
leak, and also differed from the other place where this happens.
Make this case the same as the other one.
Signed-off-by: Olaf Seibert <o.seib...@syseleven.de>
---
northd/northd.c | 5 +++++
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
diff --git a/northd/northd.c b/northd/northd.c
index 09eccf4d9..4d34f7ebc 100644
--- a/northd/northd.c
+++ b/northd/northd.c
@@ -3437,7 +3437,12 @@ ovn_port_update_sbrec(struct northd_input *input_data,
struct smap ids = SMAP_INITIALIZER(&ids);
smap_clone(&ids, &op->nbrp->external_ids);
+ const char *name = smap_get(&ids, "neutron:port_name");
+ if (name && name[0]) {
+ smap_add(&ids, "name", name);
+ }
sbrec_port_binding_set_external_ids(op->sb, &ids);
+ smap_destroy(&ids);
sbrec_port_binding_set_nat_addresses(op->sb, NULL, 0);
} else {
--
2.37.2
So which variant would be preferred? It looks like variant #3 might be needed,
due to the "name" name. If not, #2 would be the shortest version. If that one
is inappropriate, variant #1 would be it.
Cheers,
-Olaf Seibert
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
d...@openvswitch.org
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
