> On Jan 5, 2016, at 8:24 PM, Ben Pfaff <b...@ovn.org> wrote: > > Thanks. That was my experience also. > > I applied this to master and branch-2.5.
Thanks for fixing this. I reviewed the patch and it seems correct to me as well. > I think that branch-2.4 has > the same bug but the backport is not trivial and I do not know whether > it is worthwhile. > I’ll do the backport for branch-2.4, if that is fine by you. Jarno > On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 05:22:24PM -0800, William Tu wrote: >> Hi Ben, >> >> The patch works OK. It passes "make check" and "make check-valgrind" >> without reporting memory leaks. >> >> Thank you >> William >> >> On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 5:02 PM, William Tu <u9012...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi Ben, >>> >>> Sure, I will test this fix. >>> >>> Regards, >>> William >>> >>> On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 4:55 PM, Ben Pfaff <b...@ovn.org> wrote: >>> >>>> Thanks. Would you mind testing this proposed fix? >>>> http://openvswitch.org/pipermail/dev/2016-January/064070.html >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 11:32:48AM -0800, William Tu wrote: >>>>> Hi Ben, >>>>> >>>>> These two tests generate the leak: >>>>> mpls_xlate >>>>> 381: MPLS xlate action >>>>> ofproto-dpif >>>>> 852: ofproto-dpif - MPLS handling >>>>> >>>>> ==65139== by 0x4E1C83: xmemdup (util.c:134) >>>>> ==65139== by 0x431044: recirc_state_clone (ofproto-dpif-rid.c:221) >>>>> ==65139== by 0x431044: recirc_alloc_id__ (ofproto-dpif-rid.c:238) >>>>> ==65139== by 0x4315B8: recirc_alloc_id_ctx (ofproto-dpif-rid.c:281) >>>>> ==65139== by 0x437C96: compose_recirculate_action__ >>>>> (ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:3643) >>>>> ==65139== by 0x44095A: compose_recirculate_action >>>>> (ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:3664) >>>>> ==65139== by 0x44095A: xlate_actions (ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:5324) >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> William >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 11:22 AM, Ben Pfaff <b...@ovn.org> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I think that recirc_run needs to be modified so that >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 06:40:23PM +0000, ChengChun Tu wrote: >>>>>>> Hi Ben, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Yes, Valgrind testcase 381 reports leak and generates the call stack >>>>>> below: >>>>>>> I tried to debug it for a while but not able to understand it. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, what's the name of that test case? The one I see as 381 >>>> doesn't >>>>>> seem relevant. >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> dev mailing list >>>>>> dev@openvswitch.org >>>>>> http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev >>>>>> >>>> >>> >>> > _______________________________________________ > dev mailing list > dev@openvswitch.org > http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
