Memory leaks

[asgard38]

libvirtd leaks a lot of memory when using glusterfs driver.
Here some output from valgrind:

==27470== 2,704,894 (272 direct, 2,704,622 indirect) bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 1,926 of 1,927
==27470== at 0x4C2B974: calloc (in /usr/lib64/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
==27470== by 0x1CB35D37: __gf_calloc (in /usr/lib64/libglusterfs.so.0.0.1)
==27470== by 0x1CB25508: inode_table_new (in /usr/lib64/libglusterfs.so.0.0.1)
==27470== by 0x2B5FA904: ???
==27470== by 0x2B60B639: ???
==27470== by 0x1CB006F6: xlator_init (in /usr/lib64/libglusterfs.so.0.0.1)
==27470== by 0x1CB433F8: glusterfs_graph_init (in /usr/lib64/libglusterfs.so.0.0.1)
==27470== by 0x1CB43D0A: glusterfs_graph_activate (in /usr/lib64/libglusterfs.so.0.0.1)
==27470== by 0x1C8C598C: ??? (in /usr/lib64/libgfapi.so.0.0.0)
==27470== by 0x1C8C5B31: ??? (in /usr/lib64/libgfapi.so.0.0.0)
==27470== by 0x1CDB7A7F: rpc_clnt_handle_reply (in /usr/lib64/libgfrpc.so.0.0.1)
==27470== by 0x1CDB7D3E: rpc_clnt_notify (in /usr/lib64/libgfrpc.so.0.0.1)

==27470== 639,120 bytes in 2 blocks are possibly lost in loss record 1,917 of 1,927
==27470== at 0x4C2B974: calloc (in /usr/lib64/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
==27470== by 0x1CB35D37: __gf_calloc (in /usr/lib64/libglusterfs.so.0.0.1)
==27470== by 0x1CB364E6: mem_pool_new_fn (in /usr/lib64/libglusterfs.so.0.0.1)
==27470== by 0x1CB2555A: inode_table_new (in /usr/lib64/libglusterfs.so.0.0.1)
==27470== by 0x2B3B3904: ???
==27470== by 0x2B3C4639: ???
==27470== by 0x1CB006F6: xlator_init (in /usr/lib64/libglusterfs.so.0.0.1)
==27470== by 0x1CB433F8: glusterfs_graph_init (in /usr/lib64/libglusterfs.so.0.0.1)
==27470== by 0x1CB43D0A: glusterfs_graph_activate (in /usr/lib64/libglusterfs.so.0.0.1)
==27470== by 0x1C8C598C: ??? (in /usr/lib64/libgfapi.so.0.0.0)
==27470== by 0x1C8C5B31: ??? (in /usr/lib64/libgfapi.so.0.0.0)
==27470== by 0x1CDB7A7F: rpc_clnt_handle_reply (in /usr/lib64/libgfrpc.so.0.0.1)

Version information:
CentOS Linux release 7.2.1511

glusterfs-client-xlators-3.7.1-16.0.1.el7.centos.x86_64
glusterfs-fuse-3.7.1-16.0.1.el7.centos.x86_64
glusterfs-3.7.1-16.0.1.el7.centos.x86_64
glusterfs-api-3.7.1-16.0.1.el7.centos.x86_64
glusterfs-libs-3.7.1-16.0.1.el7.centos.x86_64
libvirt-1.2.17-13.el7_2.5.x86_64
qemu-kvm-1.5.3-105.el7_2.7.x86_64

[unitednettech]

Hello,
We made some tests with libvirtd running under valgrind with GlusterFS enabled.
Valgrind reports many memory leaks in GlusterFS driver. Library libglusterfs.so.0.0.1
For example:
==31235== 7,794 (5,712 direct, 2,082 indirect) bytes in 2 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 2,726 of 2,802
==31235== at 0x4C2B974: calloc (in /usr/lib64/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
==31235== by 0x1CB35D37: __gf_calloc (in /usr/lib64/libglusterfs.so.0.0.1)
==31235== by 0x1CDB2AB8: rpc_transport_load (in /usr/lib64/libgfrpc.so.0.0.1)
==31235== by 0x1CDB75CF: rpc_clnt_new (in /usr/lib64/libgfrpc.so.0.0.1)
==31235== by 0x29B86E4D: ???
==31235== by 0x29B88022: ???
==31235== by 0x1CB006F6: xlator_init (in /usr/lib64/libglusterfs.so.0.0.1)
==31235== by 0x1CB433F8: glusterfs_graph_init (in /usr/lib64/libglusterfs.so.0.0.1)
==31235== by 0x1CB43D0A: glusterfs_graph_activate (in /usr/lib64/libglusterfs.so.0.0.1)
==31235== by 0x1C8C598C: ??? (in /usr/lib64/libgfapi.so.0.0.0)
==31235== by 0x1C8C5B31: ??? (in /usr/lib64/libgfapi.so.0.0.0)
==31235== by 0x1CDB7A7F: rpc_clnt_handle_reply (in /usr/lib64/libgfrpc.so.0.0.1)

[unitednettech]

We are talking the same thing !!!

We made some tests with libvirtd running under valgrind with GlusterFS enabled.
Valgrind reports many memory leaks in GlusterFS driver. Library libglusterfs.so.0.0.1
For example:
==31235== 7,794 (5,712 direct, 2,082 indirect) bytes in 2 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 2,726 of 2,802
==31235== at 0x4C2B974: calloc (in /usr/lib64/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
==31235== by 0x1CB35D37: __gf_calloc (in /usr/lib64/libglusterfs.so.0.0.1)
==31235== by 0x1CDB2AB8: rpc_transport_load (in /usr/lib64/libgfrpc.so.0.0.1)
==31235== by 0x1CDB75CF: rpc_clnt_new (in /usr/lib64/libgfrpc.so.0.0.1)
==31235== by 0x29B86E4D: ???
==31235== by 0x29B88022: ???
==31235== by 0x1CB006F6: xlator_init (in /usr/lib64/libglusterfs.so.0.0.1)
==31235== by 0x1CB433F8: glusterfs_graph_init (in /usr/lib64/libglusterfs.so.0.0.1)
==31235== by 0x1CB43D0A: glusterfs_graph_activate (in /usr/lib64/libglusterfs.so.0.0.1)
==31235== by 0x1C8C598C: ??? (in /usr/lib64/libgfapi.so.0.0.0)
==31235== by 0x1C8C5B31: ??? (in /usr/lib64/libgfapi.so.0.0.0)
==31235== by 0x1CDB7A7F: rpc_clnt_handle_reply (in /usr/lib64/libgfrpc.so.0.0.1)

[stale]

Thank you for your contributions.
Noticed that this issue is not having any activity in last ~6 months! We are marking this issue as stale because it has not had recent activity.
It will be closed in 2 weeks if no one responds with a comment here.

[stale]

Closing this issue as there was no update since my last update on issue. If this is an issue which is still valid, feel free to open it.

[stale]

Closing this issue as there was no update since my last update on issue. If this is an issue which is still valid, feel free to open it.