* [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] vhost: clean up per-socket mutex
@ 2017-06-12 21:29 Daniel Verkamp
2017-06-14 8:19 ` Jens Freimann
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Verkamp @ 2017-06-12 21:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: dev; +Cc: Daniel Verkamp
vsocket->conn_mutex was allocated with pthread_mutex_init() but never
freed with pthread_mutex_destroy(). This is a potential memory leak,
depending on how pthread_mutex_t is implemented.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Verkamp <daniel.verkamp@intel.com>
---
lib/librte_vhost/socket.c | 3 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
diff --git a/lib/librte_vhost/socket.c b/lib/librte_vhost/socket.c
index c7f99b0..9720773 100644
--- a/lib/librte_vhost/socket.c
+++ b/lib/librte_vhost/socket.c
@@ -636,6 +636,7 @@ rte_vhost_driver_register(const char *path, uint64_t flags)
vsocket->reconnect = !(flags & RTE_VHOST_USER_NO_RECONNECT);
if (vsocket->reconnect && reconn_tid == 0) {
if (vhost_user_reconnect_init() < 0) {
+ pthread_mutex_destroy(&vsocket->conn_mutex);
free(vsocket->path);
free(vsocket);
goto out;
@@ -646,6 +647,7 @@ rte_vhost_driver_register(const char *path, uint64_t flags)
}
ret = create_unix_socket(vsocket);
if (ret < 0) {
+ pthread_mutex_destroy(&vsocket->conn_mutex);
free(vsocket->path);
free(vsocket);
goto out;
@@ -724,6 +726,7 @@ rte_vhost_driver_unregister(const char *path)
}
pthread_mutex_unlock(&vsocket->conn_mutex);
+ pthread_mutex_destroy(&vsocket->conn_mutex);
free(vsocket->path);
free(vsocket);
--
2.9.4
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] vhost: clean up per-socket mutex
2017-06-12 21:29 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] vhost: clean up per-socket mutex Daniel Verkamp
@ 2017-06-14 8:19 ` Jens Freimann
2017-07-01 23:25 ` Yuanhan Liu
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Jens Freimann @ 2017-06-14 8:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Daniel Verkamp; +Cc: dev, Maxime Coquelin (mcoqueli), Yuanhan Liu
On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 02:29:04PM -0700, Daniel Verkamp wrote:
> vsocket->conn_mutex was allocated with pthread_mutex_init() but never
> freed with pthread_mutex_destroy(). This is a potential memory leak,
> depending on how pthread_mutex_t is implemented.
>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Verkamp <daniel.verkamp@intel.com>
> ---
> lib/librte_vhost/socket.c | 3 +++
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/lib/librte_vhost/socket.c b/lib/librte_vhost/socket.c
> index c7f99b0..9720773 100644
> --- a/lib/librte_vhost/socket.c
> +++ b/lib/librte_vhost/socket.c
> @@ -636,6 +636,7 @@ rte_vhost_driver_register(const char *path, uint64_t flags)
> vsocket->reconnect = !(flags & RTE_VHOST_USER_NO_RECONNECT);
> if (vsocket->reconnect && reconn_tid == 0) {
> if (vhost_user_reconnect_init() < 0) {
> + pthread_mutex_destroy(&vsocket->conn_mutex);
> free(vsocket->path);
> free(vsocket);
> goto out;
> @@ -646,6 +647,7 @@ rte_vhost_driver_register(const char *path, uint64_t flags)
> }
> ret = create_unix_socket(vsocket);
> if (ret < 0) {
> + pthread_mutex_destroy(&vsocket->conn_mutex);
> free(vsocket->path);
> free(vsocket);
> goto out;
> @@ -724,6 +726,7 @@ rte_vhost_driver_unregister(const char *path)
> }
> pthread_mutex_unlock(&vsocket->conn_mutex);
>
> + pthread_mutex_destroy(&vsocket->conn_mutex);
Seems like we never do it, but shouldn't we check the return value
here?
regards,
Jens
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] vhost: clean up per-socket mutex
2017-06-14 8:19 ` Jens Freimann
@ 2017-07-01 23:25 ` Yuanhan Liu
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Yuanhan Liu @ 2017-07-01 23:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jens Freimann; +Cc: Daniel Verkamp, dev, Maxime Coquelin (mcoqueli)
On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 10:19:53AM +0200, Jens Freimann wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 02:29:04PM -0700, Daniel Verkamp wrote:
> > vsocket->conn_mutex was allocated with pthread_mutex_init() but never
> > freed with pthread_mutex_destroy(). This is a potential memory leak,
> > depending on how pthread_mutex_t is implemented.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Verkamp <daniel.verkamp@intel.com>
> > ---
> > lib/librte_vhost/socket.c | 3 +++
> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/lib/librte_vhost/socket.c b/lib/librte_vhost/socket.c
> > index c7f99b0..9720773 100644
> > --- a/lib/librte_vhost/socket.c
> > +++ b/lib/librte_vhost/socket.c
> > @@ -636,6 +636,7 @@ rte_vhost_driver_register(const char *path, uint64_t flags)
> > vsocket->reconnect = !(flags & RTE_VHOST_USER_NO_RECONNECT);
> > if (vsocket->reconnect && reconn_tid == 0) {
> > if (vhost_user_reconnect_init() < 0) {
> > + pthread_mutex_destroy(&vsocket->conn_mutex);
> > free(vsocket->path);
> > free(vsocket);
> > goto out;
> > @@ -646,6 +647,7 @@ rte_vhost_driver_register(const char *path, uint64_t flags)
> > }
> > ret = create_unix_socket(vsocket);
> > if (ret < 0) {
> > + pthread_mutex_destroy(&vsocket->conn_mutex);
> > free(vsocket->path);
> > free(vsocket);
> > goto out;
> > @@ -724,6 +726,7 @@ rte_vhost_driver_unregister(const char *path)
> > }
> > pthread_mutex_unlock(&vsocket->conn_mutex);
> >
> > + pthread_mutex_destroy(&vsocket->conn_mutex);
>
> Seems like we never do it, but shouldn't we check the return value
> here?
I think so. There are more: pthread_mutex_init/lock, etc. We probably
should make another patch to fix it. For this patch, I'd like to apply
as it is.
So applied to dpdk-next-virtio.
Thanks.
--yliu
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2017-07-01 23:25 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2017-06-12 21:29 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] vhost: clean up per-socket mutex Daniel Verkamp
2017-06-14 8:19 ` Jens Freimann
2017-07-01 23:25 ` Yuanhan Liu
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).