netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Memory leak in 2.6.11-rc1?

To: Patrick McHardy <kaber@xxxxxxxxx>, "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Robert.Olsson@xxxxxxxxxxx, akpm@xxxxxxxx, torvalds@xxxxxxxx, alexn@xxxxxxxxx, kas@xxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Memory leak in 2.6.11-rc1?
From: Phil Oester <kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 10:19:13 -0800
In-reply-to: <20050130180146.E25000@flint.arm.linux.org.uk>
References: <16888.58622.376497.380197@robur.slu.se> <20050127164918.C3036@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <20050127123326.2eafab35.davem@davemloft.net> <20050128001701.D22695@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <20050127163444.1bfb673b.davem@davemloft.net> <20050128085858.B9486@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <20050130132343.A25000@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <41FD17FE.6050007@trash.net> <41FD18C5.6090108@trash.net> <20050130180146.E25000@flint.arm.linux.org.uk>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
On Sun, Jan 30, 2005 at 06:01:46PM +0000, Russell King wrote:
> > OTOH, if conntrack isn't loaded forwarded packet are never defragmented,
> > so frag_list should be empty. So probably false alarm, sorry.
> 
> I've just checked Phil's mails - both Phil and myself are using
> netfilter on the troublesome boxen.
> 
> Also, since FragCreates is zero, and this does mean that the frag_list
> is not empty in all cases so far where ip_fragment() has been called.
> (Reading the code, if frag_list was empty, we'd have to create some
> fragments, which increments the FragCreates statistic.)

The below testcase seems to illustrate the problem nicely -- ip_dst_cache
grows but never shrinks:

On gateway:

iptables -I FORWARD -d 10.10.10.0/24 -j DROP

On client:

for i in `seq 1 254` ; do ping -s 1500 -c 5 -w 1 -f 10.10.10.$i ; done


Phil

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>