On Fri, 2006-11-10 at 15:44 +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Daniel Schnell wrote:
> > Hi Jan,
> >
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >> Maybe that bug is a symptom of some other scalability issue.
> >
> > I suppose so, too.
> >
> >>> +++
> >>> bash-2.05b# cat /proc/heap
> >>> size=131072:used=134400:pagesz=512
> >>> +++
> >>>
> >>> This looks odd. Either the output is misleading or we have used more
> >>> resources than possible. But then I would expect that the Xenomai
> >>> initialization routines (e.g. pthread_create(), rt_dev_open(), etc.)
> >>> should return with an error. Either should be fixed, I suppose.
> >> Every services that allocates memory from the real-time heap should
> >> fail now. If it doesn't (pthread_create is a good test candidate
> >> here), we "only" face a statistics bug. Can you confirm that starting
> >> further applications only increases the used counter but otherwise
> >> works?
> >
> > I was running the cyclictest and the switchbench without problems at the
> > same time and the /proc/xenomai/heap showed even a usage of 135 kBytes.
> > So I assume that is a statistics bug.
>
> ...or some overwritten memory: The block size is encoded in each heap
> chunk. Looks to me like we do not check for its sanity with a magic
> number or so, do we? Would be a nice debug feature. Someone around who's
> bored (rhetoric question)?
>
The block size is encoded in the pagemap area, idle blocks carry forward
links into the free list for a given page. If we go down the way adding
redzones to detect overwrites, I'm afraid that we would have to add them
all over the place, since trashing the pagemap means that the entire
heap is basically dead in the water.
Regarding the size/used inconsistency from /proc/xenomai/heap, I would
also rather suspect that xnheap::ubytes is being miscomputed, rather
than trashed. E.g. there could be some mismatch/misuse in
xnheap_alloc/xnheap_free, between block sizes implicitely derived from
the log2 value found in the pagemap entries, and the sizes computed for
blocks larger than 2 * page_size. In any case, I already see a bug there
for allocation requests greater than 2 * page_size, but that would have
the opposite effect than the current issue (i.e. leakage in used bytes
accounting):
--- ksrc/nucleus/heap.c (revision 1809)
+++ ksrc/nucleus/heap.c (working copy)
@@ -468,7 +468,7 @@
block = get_free_range(heap, size, 0);
if (block)
- heap->ubytes += size;
+ heap->ubytes += xnheap_align(size, heap->pagesize);
}
release_and_exit:
[...]
--
Philippe.
_______________________________________________
Xenomai-help mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-help
