Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Regression, bisected: reference leak with IPSec since ~2.6.31 | From | Eric Dumazet <> | Date | Mon, 20 Sep 2010 22:17:33 +0200 |
| |
Le lundi 20 septembre 2010 à 15:52 -0400, Nick Bowler a écrit : > On 2010-09-20 20:20 +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote: > > If you change your program to send small frames (so they are not > > fragmented), is the problem still present ? > > I changed MAX_DGRAM_SIZE in the test program to 1000 (mtu on the > interface is 1500). The short answer is that the references are > not leaked, and things seem to get cleaned up. So the rest of this > mail probably describes a separate issue. > > The long answer, however, is interesting: With latest Linus' git, the > references are cleaned up much later than I would expect. After running > the test program and flushing the SAD/SPD, the reference count is still > 1. If I repeat the test immediately, the reference count will increase > further. I can easily raise the reference count to, say, 100. Now, if > I wait a while (10 minutes or so), the reference count will still be > 100. However, when I run the setkey script after this delay, the > reference count drops immediately to 1. If I then flush the SAD/SPD, it > drops to 0. > > This behaviour is new: newer than the reported leak. For example, with > 2.6.34, everything works perfectly with MAX_DGRAM_SIZE set to 1000 (the > SAs are destroyed immediately when the SAD/SPD are flushed), but the > leak occurs with MAX_DGRAM_SIZE set to 10000. >
Thanks Nick
I suspect a skb->truesize bug somewhere.
I can see atomic_read(&sk->sk_wmem_alloc) becoming negative after a while...
I am investigating and let you know.
Thanks
-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |