qpid-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "ASF subversion and git services (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (DISPATCH-177) Valgrind finds leaks when running dispatch w/SSL
Date Fri, 01 Apr 2016 18:58:25 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DISPATCH-177?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15222175#comment-15222175
] 

ASF subversion and git services commented on DISPATCH-177:
----------------------------------------------------------

Commit 31220576d54c6c4665d92060db71a883324394b0 in qpid-dispatch's branch refs/heads/master
from [~kgiusti]
[ https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=qpid-dispatch.git;h=3122057 ]

DISPATCH-177: (partial) cleanup a few memory leaks.


> Valgrind finds leaks when running dispatch w/SSL
> ------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: DISPATCH-177
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DISPATCH-177
>             Project: Qpid Dispatch
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: Router Node
>    Affects Versions: 0.5
>            Reporter: Ken Giusti
>            Assignee: Ken Giusti
>             Fix For: 0.6
>
>
> See Pavel's results in https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ENTMQ-1149
> There are a few leaks that seem to be legit and will need investigation:
> ==26079== 7 bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 11 of 5,673
> ==26079==    at 0x4C29BFD: malloc (in /usr/lib64/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
> ==26079==    by 0x5D34529: strdup (strdup.c:42)
> ==26079==    by 0x4E4D988: qd_entity_get_string (in /usr/lib64/libqpid-dispatch.so.0.1)
> ==26079==    by 0x4E4B666: qd_dispatch_configure_connector (in /usr/lib64/libqpid-dispatch.so.0.1)
> ==26079==    by 0x12423DAB: ffi_call_unix64 (in /usr/lib64/libffi.so.6.0.1)
> ==26079==    by 0x124236D4: ffi_call (in /usr/lib64/libffi.so.6.0.1)
> ==26079==    by 0x12210C8A: _call_function_pointer (callproc.c:832)
> ==26079==    by 0x12210C8A: _ctypes_callproc (callproc.c:1179)
> ==26079==    by 0x1220AA84: PyCFuncPtr_call (_ctypes.c:3929)
> ==26079==    by 0x5932072: PyObject_Call (abstract.c:2529)
> ==26079==    by 0x59C634B: do_call (ceval.c:4316)
> ==26079==    by 0x59C634B: call_function (ceval.c:4121)
> ==26079==    by 0x59C634B: PyEval_EvalFrameEx (ceval.c:2740)
> ==26079==    by 0x59C894F: fast_function (ceval.c:4184)
> ==26079==    by 0x59C894F: call_function (ceval.c:4119)
> ==26079==    by 0x59C894F: PyEval_EvalFrameEx (ceval.c:2740)
> ==26079==    by 0x59C894F: fast_function (ceval.c:4184)
> ==26079==    by 0x59C894F: call_function (ceval.c:4119)
> ==26079==    by 0x59C894F: PyEval_EvalFrameEx (ceval.c:2740)
> ==26079== 10 bytes in 2 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 20 of 5,673
> ==26079==    at 0x4C29BFD: malloc (in /usr/lib64/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
> ==26079==    by 0x5D34529: strdup (strdup.c:42)
> ==26079==    by 0x4E4D988: qd_entity_get_string (in /usr/lib64/libqpid-dispatch.so.0.1)
> ==26079==    by 0x4E579C4: qd_router_configure_lrp (in /usr/lib64/libqpid-dispatch.so.0.1)
> ==26079==    by 0x4E4D671: qd_dispatch_configure_lrp (in /usr/lib64/libqpid-dispatch.so.0.1)
> ==26079==    by 0x12423DAB: ffi_call_unix64 (in /usr/lib64/libffi.so.6.0.1)
> ==26079==    by 0x124236D4: ffi_call (in /usr/lib64/libffi.so.6.0.1)
> ==26079==    by 0x12210C8A: _call_function_pointer (callproc.c:832)
> ==26079==    by 0x12210C8A: _ctypes_callproc (callproc.c:1179)
> ==26079==    by 0x1220AA84: PyCFuncPtr_call (_ctypes.c:3929)
> ==26079==    by 0x5932072: PyObject_Call (abstract.c:2529)
> ==26079==    by 0x59C634B: do_call (ceval.c:4316)
> ==26079==    by 0x59C634B: call_function (ceval.c:4121)
> ==26079==    by 0x59C634B: PyEval_EvalFrameEx (ceval.c:2740)
> ==26079==    by 0x59C894F: fast_function (ceval.c:4184)
> ==26079==    by 0x59C894F: call_function (ceval.c:4119)
> ==26079==    by 0x59C894F: PyEval_EvalFrameEx (ceval.c:2740)
> ==26079== 240 bytes in 4 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 4,198 of 5,673
> ==26079==    at 0x4C29BFD: malloc (in /usr/lib64/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
> ==26079==    by 0x4E48986: qd_alloc (in /usr/lib64/libqpid-dispatch.so.0.1)
> ==26079==    by 0x4E59B80: qd_router_add_lrp_ref_LH (in /usr/lib64/libqpid-dispatch.so.0.1)
> ==26079==    by 0x4E4E637: ??? (in /usr/lib64/libqpid-dispatch.so.0.1)
> ==26079==    by 0x4E4C25B: ??? (in /usr/lib64/libqpid-dispatch.so.0.1)
> ==26079==    by 0x4E5E9DB: ??? (in /usr/lib64/libqpid-dispatch.so.0.1)
> ==26079==    by 0x52C7DF4: start_thread (pthread_create.c:308)
> ==26079==    by 0x5DA41AC: clone (clone.S:113)
> ==26079== 248 bytes in 2 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 4,203 of 5,673
> ==26079==    at 0x4C29BFD: malloc (in /usr/lib64/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
> ==26079==    by 0x4E48986: qd_alloc (in /usr/lib64/libqpid-dispatch.so.0.1)
> ==26079==    by 0x4E4FA2E: qd_field_iterator_string (in /usr/lib64/libqpid-dispatch.so.0.1)
> ==26079==    by 0x4E4C7E9: qd_container_register_node_type (in /usr/lib64/libqpid-dispatch.so.0.1)
> ==26079==    by 0x4E5C045: qd_router (in /usr/lib64/libqpid-dispatch.so.0.1)
> ==26079==    by 0x4E4D6D1: qd_dispatch_prepare (in /usr/lib64/libqpid-dispatch.so.0.1)
> ==26079==    by 0x12423DAB: ffi_call_unix64 (in /usr/lib64/libffi.so.6.0.1)
> ==26079==    by 0x124236D4: ffi_call (in /usr/lib64/libffi.so.6.0.1)
> ==26079==    by 0x12210C8A: _call_function_pointer (callproc.c:832)
> ==26079==    by 0x12210C8A: _ctypes_callproc (callproc.c:1179)
> ==26079==    by 0x1220AA84: PyCFuncPtr_call (_ctypes.c:3929)
> ==26079==    by 0x5932072: PyObject_Call (abstract.c:2529)
> ==26079==    by 0x59C634B: do_call (ceval.c:4316)
> ==26079==    by 0x59C634B: call_function (ceval.c:4121)
> ==26079==    by 0x59C634B: PyEval_EvalFrameEx (ceval.c:2740)
> ==26079== 272 (100 direct, 172 indirect) bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss
record 4,272 of 5,673
> ==26079==    at 0x4C29BFD: malloc (in /usr/lib64/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
> ==26079==    by 0x4E48986: qd_alloc (in /usr/lib64/libqpid-dispatch.so.0.1)
> ==26079==    by 0x4E5D1A1: ??? (in /usr/lib64/libqpid-dispatch.so.0.1)
> ==26079==    by 0x59C8B93: call_function (ceval.c:4098)
> ==26079==    by 0x59C8B93: PyEval_EvalFrameEx (ceval.c:2740)
> ==26079==    by 0x59CA1AC: PyEval_EvalCodeEx (ceval.c:3330)
> ==26079==    by 0x5957097: function_call (funcobject.c:526)
> ==26079==    by 0x5932072: PyObject_Call (abstract.c:2529)
> ==26079==    by 0x5941084: instancemethod_call (classobject.c:2602)
> ==26079==    by 0x5932072: PyObject_Call (abstract.c:2529)
> ==26079==    by 0x5989166: slot_tp_init (typeobject.c:5692)
> ==26079==    by 0x5987E7E: type_call (typeobject.c:745)
> ==26079==    by 0x5932072: PyObject_Call (abstract.c:2529)



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@qpid.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@qpid.apache.org


Mime
View raw message