* Re: dpdk address sanitizer
[not found] <AM0PR04MB66929C6A4ECBCAC57C8C9C87D9AF9@AM0PR04MB6692.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
@ 2022-06-17 5:45 ` David Marchand
2022-06-17 16:17 ` Stephen Hemminger
2022-06-17 21:24 ` Juan Pablo L.
0 siblings, 2 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: David Marchand @ 2022-06-17 5:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Juan Pablo L.; +Cc: users, Burakov, Anatoly, Dmitry Kozlyuk, dev, ci
Hello,
On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 6:08 AM Juan Pablo L.
<jpablolorenzetti@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hello, I am new to dpdk ... i would like to trace memory usage and detect memory leaks, valgrind as well as address sanitizer (gcc) report some memory loss at application end. For the life of me, i cannot figure it out ... i just write a simple program that has the rte_eal_init + rte_eal_cleanup and i get the following error (also tried helloworld from examples, with same results):
>
> ==3399==ERROR: AddressSanitizer: stack-buffer-overflow on address 0x7f6ca3efb480 at pc 0x7f6ca7162b61 bp 0x7f6ca3efb450 sp 0x7f6ca3efac00
> WRITE of size 24 at 0x7f6ca3efb480 thread T-1
> #0 0x7f6ca7162b60 in __interceptor_sigaltstack.part.0 (/lib64/libasan.so.8+0x61b60)
> #1 0x7f6ca71d9337 in __sanitizer::UnsetAlternateSignalStack() (/lib64/libasan.so.8+0xd8337)
> #2 0x7f6ca71c90f4 in __asan::AsanThread::Destroy() (/lib64/libasan.so.8+0xc80f4)
> #3 0x7f6ca679b000 in __GI___nptl_deallocate_tsd (/lib64/libc.so.6+0x8a000)
> #4 0x7f6ca679dc9d in start_thread (/lib64/libc.so.6+0x8cc9d)
> #5 0x7f6ca68235df in __GI___clone3 (/lib64/libc.so.6+0x1125df)
>
> Address 0x7f6ca3efb480 is a wild pointer inside of access range of size 0x000000000018.
> SUMMARY: AddressSanitizer: stack-buffer-overflow (/lib64/libasan.so.8+0x61b60) in __interceptor_sigaltstack.part.0
> Shadow bytes around the buggy address:
> 0x0fee147d7640: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 f1 f1 f1 f1 00 00 00 00
> 0x0fee147d7650: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 06 f2 f2 f2 f2 00 00
> 0x0fee147d7660: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> 0x0fee147d7670: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> 0x0fee147d7680: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 04 f3 f3 f3 f3
> =>0x0fee147d7690:[f3]f3 f3 f3 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> 0x0fee147d76a0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> 0x0fee147d76b0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> 0x0fee147d76c0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> 0x0fee147d76d0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> 0x0fee147d76e0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> Shadow byte legend (one shadow byte represents 8 application bytes):
> Addressable: 00
> Partially addressable: 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
> Heap left redzone: fa
> Freed heap region: fd
> Stack left redzone: f1
> Stack mid redzone: f2
> Stack right redzone: f3
> Stack after return: f5
> Stack use after scope: f8
> Global redzone: f9
> Global init order: f6
> Poisoned by user: f7
> Container overflow: fc
> Array cookie: ac
> Intra object redzone: bb
> ASan internal: fe
> Left alloca redzone: ca
> Right alloca redzone: cb
> ==3399==ABORTING
>
> I am not sure what I m doing wrong but it is very frustrating. On top of that, I try other scenarios and see if I can just "ignore" that and still detect other memory leaks but it does not work. I get memory from rte_malloc and don't free it and I still get the above report only, I do not get any report from the memory I leaked intentionally ... no difference what so ever .... I tried the same with the helloworld example and I get the same results ....
I experienced the same issue recently on Fedora 36.
I did not investigate.
I think I waived this warning, by setting
ASAN_OPTIONS="use_sigaltstack=0" in the environment.
HTH.
--
David Marchand
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: dpdk address sanitizer
2022-06-17 5:45 ` dpdk address sanitizer David Marchand
@ 2022-06-17 16:17 ` Stephen Hemminger
2022-06-19 2:39 ` Juan Pablo L.
2022-06-17 21:24 ` Juan Pablo L.
1 sibling, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Hemminger @ 2022-06-17 16:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Marchand
Cc: Juan Pablo L., users, Burakov, Anatoly, Dmitry Kozlyuk, dev, ci
On Fri, 17 Jun 2022 07:45:33 +0200
David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 6:08 AM Juan Pablo L.
> <jpablolorenzetti@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hello, I am new to dpdk ... i would like to trace memory usage and detect memory leaks, valgrind as well as address sanitizer (gcc) report some memory loss at application end. For the life of me, i cannot figure it out ... i just write a simple program that has the rte_eal_init + rte_eal_cleanup and i get the following error (also tried helloworld from examples, with same results):
> >
> > ==3399==ERROR: AddressSanitizer: stack-buffer-overflow on address 0x7f6ca3efb480 at pc 0x7f6ca7162b61 bp 0x7f6ca3efb450 sp 0x7f6ca3efac00
> > WRITE of size 24 at 0x7f6ca3efb480 thread T-1
> > #0 0x7f6ca7162b60 in __interceptor_sigaltstack.part.0 (/lib64/libasan.so.8+0x61b60)
> > #1 0x7f6ca71d9337 in __sanitizer::UnsetAlternateSignalStack() (/lib64/libasan.so.8+0xd8337)
> > #2 0x7f6ca71c90f4 in __asan::AsanThread::Destroy() (/lib64/libasan.so.8+0xc80f4)
> > #3 0x7f6ca679b000 in __GI___nptl_deallocate_tsd (/lib64/libc.so.6+0x8a000)
> > #4 0x7f6ca679dc9d in start_thread (/lib64/libc.so.6+0x8cc9d)
> > #5 0x7f6ca68235df in __GI___clone3 (/lib64/libc.so.6+0x1125df)
> >
> > Address 0x7f6ca3efb480 is a wild pointer inside of access range of size 0x000000000018.
> > SUMMARY: AddressSanitizer: stack-buffer-overflow (/lib64/libasan.so.8+0x61b60) in __interceptor_sigaltstack.part.0
> > Shadow bytes around the buggy address:
> > 0x0fee147d7640: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 f1 f1 f1 f1 00 00 00 00
> > 0x0fee147d7650: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 06 f2 f2 f2 f2 00 00
> > 0x0fee147d7660: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> > 0x0fee147d7670: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> > 0x0fee147d7680: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 04 f3 f3 f3 f3
> > =>0x0fee147d7690:[f3]f3 f3 f3 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> > 0x0fee147d76a0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> > 0x0fee147d76b0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> > 0x0fee147d76c0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> > 0x0fee147d76d0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> > 0x0fee147d76e0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> > Shadow byte legend (one shadow byte represents 8 application bytes):
> > Addressable: 00
> > Partially addressable: 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
> > Heap left redzone: fa
> > Freed heap region: fd
> > Stack left redzone: f1
> > Stack mid redzone: f2
> > Stack right redzone: f3
> > Stack after return: f5
> > Stack use after scope: f8
> > Global redzone: f9
> > Global init order: f6
> > Poisoned by user: f7
> > Container overflow: fc
> > Array cookie: ac
> > Intra object redzone: bb
> > ASan internal: fe
> > Left alloca redzone: ca
> > Right alloca redzone: cb
> > ==3399==ABORTING
> >
> > I am not sure what I m doing wrong but it is very frustrating. On top of that, I try other scenarios and see if I can just "ignore" that and still detect other memory leaks but it does not work. I get memory from rte_malloc and don't free it and I still get the above report only, I do not get any report from the memory I leaked intentionally ... no difference what so ever .... I tried the same with the helloworld example and I get the same results ....
>
> I experienced the same issue recently on Fedora 36.
> I did not investigate.
>
> I think I waived this warning, by setting
> ASAN_OPTIONS="use_sigaltstack=0" in the environment.
> HTH.
>
Looks like the alternate signal stack allocated inside address sanitizer is not big enough.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: dpdk address sanitizer
2022-06-17 5:45 ` dpdk address sanitizer David Marchand
2022-06-17 16:17 ` Stephen Hemminger
@ 2022-06-17 21:24 ` Juan Pablo L.
1 sibling, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Juan Pablo L. @ 2022-06-17 21:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Marchand; +Cc: users, Burakov, Anatoly, Dmitry Kozlyuk, dev, ci
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3859 bytes --]
Thank you very much, I will try that.
Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg>
________________________________
From: David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2022 11:45:33 PM
To: Juan Pablo L. <jpablolorenzetti@hotmail.com>
Cc: users@dpdk.org <users@dpdk.org>; Burakov, Anatoly <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>; Dmitry Kozlyuk <dmitry.kozliuk@gmail.com>; dev <dev@dpdk.org>; ci@dpdk.org <ci@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: dpdk address sanitizer
Hello,
On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 6:08 AM Juan Pablo L.
<jpablolorenzetti@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hello, I am new to dpdk ... i would like to trace memory usage and detect memory leaks, valgrind as well as address sanitizer (gcc) report some memory loss at application end. For the life of me, i cannot figure it out ... i just write a simple program that has the rte_eal_init + rte_eal_cleanup and i get the following error (also tried helloworld from examples, with same results):
>
> ==3399==ERROR: AddressSanitizer: stack-buffer-overflow on address 0x7f6ca3efb480 at pc 0x7f6ca7162b61 bp 0x7f6ca3efb450 sp 0x7f6ca3efac00
> WRITE of size 24 at 0x7f6ca3efb480 thread T-1
> #0 0x7f6ca7162b60 in __interceptor_sigaltstack.part.0 (/lib64/libasan.so.8+0x61b60)
> #1 0x7f6ca71d9337 in __sanitizer::UnsetAlternateSignalStack() (/lib64/libasan.so.8+0xd8337)
> #2 0x7f6ca71c90f4 in __asan::AsanThread::Destroy() (/lib64/libasan.so.8+0xc80f4)
> #3 0x7f6ca679b000 in __GI___nptl_deallocate_tsd (/lib64/libc.so.6+0x8a000)
> #4 0x7f6ca679dc9d in start_thread (/lib64/libc.so.6+0x8cc9d)
> #5 0x7f6ca68235df in __GI___clone3 (/lib64/libc.so.6+0x1125df)
>
> Address 0x7f6ca3efb480 is a wild pointer inside of access range of size 0x000000000018.
> SUMMARY: AddressSanitizer: stack-buffer-overflow (/lib64/libasan.so.8+0x61b60) in __interceptor_sigaltstack.part.0
> Shadow bytes around the buggy address:
> 0x0fee147d7640: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 f1 f1 f1 f1 00 00 00 00
> 0x0fee147d7650: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 06 f2 f2 f2 f2 00 00
> 0x0fee147d7660: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> 0x0fee147d7670: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> 0x0fee147d7680: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 04 f3 f3 f3 f3
> =>0x0fee147d7690:[f3]f3 f3 f3 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> 0x0fee147d76a0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> 0x0fee147d76b0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> 0x0fee147d76c0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> 0x0fee147d76d0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> 0x0fee147d76e0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> Shadow byte legend (one shadow byte represents 8 application bytes):
> Addressable: 00
> Partially addressable: 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
> Heap left redzone: fa
> Freed heap region: fd
> Stack left redzone: f1
> Stack mid redzone: f2
> Stack right redzone: f3
> Stack after return: f5
> Stack use after scope: f8
> Global redzone: f9
> Global init order: f6
> Poisoned by user: f7
> Container overflow: fc
> Array cookie: ac
> Intra object redzone: bb
> ASan internal: fe
> Left alloca redzone: ca
> Right alloca redzone: cb
> ==3399==ABORTING
>
> I am not sure what I m doing wrong but it is very frustrating. On top of that, I try other scenarios and see if I can just "ignore" that and still detect other memory leaks but it does not work. I get memory from rte_malloc and don't free it and I still get the above report only, I do not get any report from the memory I leaked intentionally ... no difference what so ever .... I tried the same with the helloworld example and I get the same results ....
I experienced the same issue recently on Fedora 36.
I did not investigate.
I think I waived this warning, by setting
ASAN_OPTIONS="use_sigaltstack=0" in the environment.
HTH.
--
David Marchand
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4994 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: dpdk address sanitizer
2022-06-17 16:17 ` Stephen Hemminger
@ 2022-06-19 2:39 ` Juan Pablo L.
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Juan Pablo L. @ 2022-06-19 2:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Hemminger, David Marchand
Cc: users, Burakov, Anatoly, Dmitry Kozlyuk, dev, ci
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4256 bytes --]
Thank you for your feedback, i will look into that .. any suggestions on what technique I can use to find memory leaks, invalid accesses, etc etc .... ?
thanks!!!
________________________________
From: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
Sent: Friday, June 17, 2022 4:17 PM
To: David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>
Cc: Juan Pablo L. <jpablolorenzetti@hotmail.com>; users@dpdk.org <users@dpdk.org>; Burakov, Anatoly <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>; Dmitry Kozlyuk <dmitry.kozliuk@gmail.com>; dev <dev@dpdk.org>; ci@dpdk.org <ci@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: dpdk address sanitizer
On Fri, 17 Jun 2022 07:45:33 +0200
David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 6:08 AM Juan Pablo L.
> <jpablolorenzetti@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hello, I am new to dpdk ... i would like to trace memory usage and detect memory leaks, valgrind as well as address sanitizer (gcc) report some memory loss at application end. For the life of me, i cannot figure it out ... i just write a simple program that has the rte_eal_init + rte_eal_cleanup and i get the following error (also tried helloworld from examples, with same results):
> >
> > ==3399==ERROR: AddressSanitizer: stack-buffer-overflow on address 0x7f6ca3efb480 at pc 0x7f6ca7162b61 bp 0x7f6ca3efb450 sp 0x7f6ca3efac00
> > WRITE of size 24 at 0x7f6ca3efb480 thread T-1
> > #0 0x7f6ca7162b60 in __interceptor_sigaltstack.part.0 (/lib64/libasan.so.8+0x61b60)
> > #1 0x7f6ca71d9337 in __sanitizer::UnsetAlternateSignalStack() (/lib64/libasan.so.8+0xd8337)
> > #2 0x7f6ca71c90f4 in __asan::AsanThread::Destroy() (/lib64/libasan.so.8+0xc80f4)
> > #3 0x7f6ca679b000 in __GI___nptl_deallocate_tsd (/lib64/libc.so.6+0x8a000)
> > #4 0x7f6ca679dc9d in start_thread (/lib64/libc.so.6+0x8cc9d)
> > #5 0x7f6ca68235df in __GI___clone3 (/lib64/libc.so.6+0x1125df)
> >
> > Address 0x7f6ca3efb480 is a wild pointer inside of access range of size 0x000000000018.
> > SUMMARY: AddressSanitizer: stack-buffer-overflow (/lib64/libasan.so.8+0x61b60) in __interceptor_sigaltstack.part.0
> > Shadow bytes around the buggy address:
> > 0x0fee147d7640: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 f1 f1 f1 f1 00 00 00 00
> > 0x0fee147d7650: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 06 f2 f2 f2 f2 00 00
> > 0x0fee147d7660: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> > 0x0fee147d7670: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> > 0x0fee147d7680: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 04 f3 f3 f3 f3
> > =>0x0fee147d7690:[f3]f3 f3 f3 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> > 0x0fee147d76a0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> > 0x0fee147d76b0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> > 0x0fee147d76c0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> > 0x0fee147d76d0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> > 0x0fee147d76e0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> > Shadow byte legend (one shadow byte represents 8 application bytes):
> > Addressable: 00
> > Partially addressable: 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
> > Heap left redzone: fa
> > Freed heap region: fd
> > Stack left redzone: f1
> > Stack mid redzone: f2
> > Stack right redzone: f3
> > Stack after return: f5
> > Stack use after scope: f8
> > Global redzone: f9
> > Global init order: f6
> > Poisoned by user: f7
> > Container overflow: fc
> > Array cookie: ac
> > Intra object redzone: bb
> > ASan internal: fe
> > Left alloca redzone: ca
> > Right alloca redzone: cb
> > ==3399==ABORTING
> >
> > I am not sure what I m doing wrong but it is very frustrating. On top of that, I try other scenarios and see if I can just "ignore" that and still detect other memory leaks but it does not work. I get memory from rte_malloc and don't free it and I still get the above report only, I do not get any report from the memory I leaked intentionally ... no difference what so ever .... I tried the same with the helloworld example and I get the same results ....
>
> I experienced the same issue recently on Fedora 36.
> I did not investigate.
>
> I think I waived this warning, by setting
> ASAN_OPTIONS="use_sigaltstack=0" in the environment.
> HTH.
>
Looks like the alternate signal stack allocated inside address sanitizer is not big enough.
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 5948 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2022-06-19 2:39 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <AM0PR04MB66929C6A4ECBCAC57C8C9C87D9AF9@AM0PR04MB6692.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
2022-06-17 5:45 ` dpdk address sanitizer David Marchand
2022-06-17 16:17 ` Stephen Hemminger
2022-06-19 2:39 ` Juan Pablo L.
2022-06-17 21:24 ` Juan Pablo L.
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).