From: Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>
To: Christian Ehrhardt <christian.ehrhardt@canonical.com>
Cc: dev <dev@dpdk.org>, Daniele Di Proietto <diproiettod@vmware.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Memory leak when adding/removing vhost_user ports
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2016 22:54:58 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160421055458.GD5872@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAATJJ0JXnsRsjec8baH1Haiuur8OnKO+XhaUhNG6RoaPaTfeGw@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 08:18:49AM +0200, Christian Ehrhardt wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 7:04 AM, Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>
> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 06:33:50PM +0200, Christian Ehrhardt wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > With that applied one (and only one) of my two guests looses connectivity
> after
> > removing the ports the first time.
>
> Yeah, that's should be because I invoked the "->destroy_device()"
> callback.
>
>
> Shouldn't that not only destroy the particular vhost_user device I remove?
I assume the "not" is typed wrong here, then yes. Well, it turned
out that I accidentally destroyed the first guest (with id 0) with
following code:
ctx.fh = g_vhost_server.server[i]->fh;
vhost_destroy_device(ctx);
server[i]->fh is initialized with 0 when no connection is established
(check below for more info), and the first id is started with 0. Anyway,
this could be fixed easily.
> See below for some better details on the test to clarify that.
>
>
> BTW, I'm curious how do you do the test? I saw you added 256 ports, but
> with 2 guests only? So, 254 of them are idle, just for testing the
> memory leak bug?
>
>
> Maybe I should describe it better:
> 1. Spawn some vhost-user ports (40 in my case)
> 2. Spawn a pair of guests that connect via four of those ports per guest
> 3. Guests only intialize one of that vhost_user based NICs
> 4. check connectivity between guests via the vhost_user based connection
> (working at this stage)
> LOOP 5-7:
> 5. add ports 41-512
> 6. remove ports 41-512
> 7. check connectivity between guests via the vhost_user based connection
Yes, it's much clearer now. Thanks.
I then don't see it's a leak from DPDK vhost-user, at least not the leak
on "struct virtio_net" I have mentioned before. "struct virito_net" will
not even be allocated for those ports never used (ports 41-512 in your case),
as it will be allocated only when there is a connection established, aka,
a guest is connected.
BTW, will you be able to reproduce it without any connections? Say, all
512 ports are added, and then deleted.
Thanks.
--yliu
>
> So the vhost_user ports the guests are using are never deleted.
> Only some extra (not even used) ports are added&removed in the loop to search
> for potential leaks over a longer lifetime of an openvswitch-dpdk based
> solution.
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-04-21 5:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-04-18 17:18 Christian Ehrhardt
2016-04-18 17:46 ` Yuanhan Liu
2016-04-18 18:14 ` Yuanhan Liu
2016-04-19 16:33 ` Christian Ehrhardt
2016-04-20 5:04 ` Yuanhan Liu
2016-04-20 6:18 ` Christian Ehrhardt
2016-04-21 5:54 ` Yuanhan Liu [this message]
2016-04-21 9:07 ` Christian Ehrhardt
2016-07-06 12:24 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Christian Ehrhardt
2016-07-06 12:24 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] vhost_user: avoid crash when exeeding file descriptors Christian Ehrhardt
2016-07-12 8:37 ` Yuanhan Liu
2016-07-15 19:46 ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-07-06 12:26 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] Memory leak when adding/removing vhost_user ports Christian Ehrhardt
2016-07-06 12:30 ` Christian Ehrhardt
2016-07-06 12:37 ` Christian Ehrhardt
2016-07-06 13:08 ` Yuanhan Liu
2016-07-12 12:08 ` Yuanhan Liu
2016-07-19 13:50 ` Christian Ehrhardt
2016-04-21 11:01 ` [dpdk-dev] " Ilya Maximets
2016-04-21 14:04 ` Christian Ehrhardt
2016-04-21 16:56 ` Yuanhan Liu
2016-04-21 16:54 ` Yuanhan Liu
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20160421055458.GD5872@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com \
--to=yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com \
--cc=christian.ehrhardt@canonical.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=diproiettod@vmware.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).