[OpenSIPS-Users] Possible memory leak related to AVPs
Răzvan Crainea
razvan at opensips.org
Mon Jun 22 09:33:57 CEST 2015
Hi, Mickael!
Both maps are relevant, because both of them contain id2name mappings.
So you should definitely look into the avp_map too. Note that those
mappings do not store AVPs, they only store the real name of the AVP, as
you use in script, and they can be populated at startup (in this case
they are stored in PKG) and runtime (stored in SHM).
It depends when the AVP should be destroyed: if they are attached to the
transaction (and they usually are), they are automatically destroyed by
the tm module. Otherwise the module that uses them, should take care of
that.
Best regards,
Răzvan Crainea
OpenSIPS Solutions
www.opensips-solutions.com
On 06/18/2015 09:56 PM, Mickael Marrache wrote:
> Hi Razvan,
>
> I looked at both avp_map and avp_map_shm. In our case, only
> avp_map_shm is relevant since the leak appears in shared memory. I
> only see 4 elements in this map while I can see a lot of remaining
> AVPs when looking at the memory dump created at shutdown using QM
> debug. Therefore, it looks like these AVPs are not in the map. Looking
> at the new_avp function in usr_avp.c, I don't see at any moment that
> an entry is added to the map for the new AVP.
>
> (gdb) print avp_map_shm->avl_count
> $5 = 4
> (gdb) print avp_map->avl_count
> $6 = 140
>
> Any idea?
>
> At which moment during execution an AVP is destroyed? Is it required
> for modules returning values to script through AVPs to destroy these
> AVPs? or are they automatically destroyed?
>
> Thanks,
> Mickael
>
> On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 7:33 PM, Răzvan Crainea <razvan at opensips.org
> <mailto:razvan at opensips.org>> wrote:
>
> Hi, Mickael!
>
> This is not entirely true - you can define AVPs with the integer
> value 0. Those will have avp->flags == 0 and avp->data == 0.
> What I'd do, is to note down the avp->id value of those AVPs and
> then try to see their names. To do that, you'd have to look into
> the avp_map and avp_map_shm maps to see the corresponding name for
> that id. Alternatively you can call in your script the avp_print()
> method, which prints all the AVPs for a specific transaction along
> with their id and names. Let me know how this goes.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Răzvan Crainea
> OpenSIPS Solutions
> www.opensips-solutions.com <http://www.opensips-solutions.com>
>
> On 06/18/2015 12:48 PM, Mickael Marrache wrote:
>> To add more information, I remember there was no way to define an
>> integer AVP with value 0. I see a lot of such AVPs.
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Mickael Marrache
>> <mickaelmarrache at gmail.com <mailto:mickaelmarrache at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Correction of my previous email.
>>
>> When I said I found AVPs without data, I may be wrong.
>> avp->flags == 0 probably means the AVP data is an integer.
>> So, that explains the weird values (e.g. 0x8000) I tried to
>> interpret as memory addresses.
>>
>> Mickael
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 11:12 AM, Mickael Marrache
>> <mickaelmarrache at gmail.com
>> <mailto:mickaelmarrache at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Razvan,
>>
>> Here is what I've done.
>>
>> I took a core dump of the attendant process. Then, I
>> stopped OpenSIPS so that it frees allocated fragments,
>> and at the end lists all fragments that are still allocated.
>>
>> In this list of fragments, I can see a lot of AVPs.
>>
>> I see some AVPs without data (avp->data == NULL,
>> avp->flags == 0). But something is weird, it looks like
>> that all AVPs that don't have data have the same id. It
>> looks like duplicate AVPs (in different memory fragments).
>>
>> Some AVPs do have data and have a format that looks valid.
>>
>> Some AVPs looks corrupted. For example, I found an AVP
>> with same ID as the AVPs without data, but avp->data ==
>> 0x8000 which looks completely wrong.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Mickael
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 10:11 AM, Mickael Marrache
>> <mickaelmarrache at gmail.com
>> <mailto:mickaelmarrache at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Razvan,
>>
>> I created a core dump for the attendant process. Is
>> it enough or we also need core dumps for other
>> processes? Note that the leak appears in shared memory.
>>
>> We do use QM debug for this version, this is how I
>> discovered the remaining AVPs at shutdown where the
>> remaining allocated memory fragments are listed.
>>
>> Do you know where I should look for the AVPs in the
>> core dump?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Mickael
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 5:11 PM, Răzvan Crainea
>> <razvan at opensips.org <mailto:razvan at opensips.org>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi, Mickael!
>>
>> I don't know what exactly might cause the leak.
>> What you can do is to try to get a core dump
>> (using tools like gcore) during low (or
>> unexisting) traffic and try to see what do the
>> AVPs that are leaking contain. Are you using QM
>> debug?
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Răzvan Crainea
>> OpenSIPS Solutions
>> www.opensips-solutions.com
>> <http://www.opensips-solutions.com>
>>
>> On 05/27/2015 12:37 PM, Mickael Marrache wrote:
>>> Any idea? Is there something that may help
>>> finding the leak cause?
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 1:17 PM, Mickael
>>> Marrache <mickaelmarrache at gmail.com
>>> <mailto:mickaelmarrache at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Any idea what we should do?
>>>
>>> I may be doing something wrong but I don't
>>> remember I had to take care of memory
>>> management when dealing with AVPs.
>>>
>>> Am I right?
>>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users at lists.opensips.org <mailto:Users at lists.opensips.org>
> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users at lists.opensips.org
> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensips.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20150622/7f362e25/attachment-0001.htm>
More information about the Users
mailing list