Re: Does opensmppbox and smsbox have serious memory issues?

[Andreas Fink]

> ==31087== 4,986,528 (77,472 direct, 4,909,056 indirect) bytes in 4,842
> blocks are definitely lost in loss record 813 of 813
> ==31087==    at 0x4027434: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:291)
> ==31087==    by 0x80970B3: gw_native_malloc (gwmem-native.c:87)
> ==31087==    by 0x80A37A1: octstr_create_from_data_real (octstr.c:263)
> ==31087==    by 0x80A3916: octstr_create_real (octstr.c:245)
> ==31087==    by 0x80A908E: octstr_format_valist_real (octstr.c:2480)
> ==31087==    by 0x80A9366: octstr_format (octstr.c:2469)
> ==31087==    by 0x80534F5: boxc_route_msg_to_smsc (opensmppbox.c:1791)
> ==31087==    by 0x8057AAE: smpp_to_bearerbox (opensmppbox.c:1638)
> ==31087==    by 0x80983AE: new_thread (gwthread-pthread.c:385)
> ==31087==    by 0x46F9C38: start_thread (pthread_create.c:304)
> ==31087==    by 0x482F78D: clone (clone.S:130)

this seems to be a leak in opensmppbox in this code segment (handle_pdu) in 
opensmppbox.c around line 1634


        case submit_sm:
                msg = pdu_to_msg(box, pdu, &reason);
                msg2 = msg;
                if (msg == NULL) {
                        resp = smpp_pdu_create(generic_nack, 
pdu->u.submit_sm.sequence_number);
                        resp->u.generic_nack.command_status = 
SMPP_ESME_RUNKNOWNERR;
                }
                else {
                        Octstr *smsc_id = boxc_route_msg_to_smsc(box, msg);  
<-smsc_id is allocated but never freeed.
                        check_multipart(box, msg, &msg_to_send, &msg2, 
&parts_list);
                        msg->sms.smsc_id = smsc_id ? octstr_duplicate(smsc_id) 
: NULL; /* its duplicated here... */
                        msg->sms.boxc_id = octstr_duplicate(box->boxc_id);
                        msg_dump(msg, 0);
                        resp = smpp_pdu_create(submit_sm_resp, 
pdu->u.submit_sm.sequence_number);
                        msgid = generate_smppid(msg);
                        msg->sms.dlr_url = octstr_duplicate(msgid);
                        resp->u.submit_sm_resp.message_id = msgid;
                        if (msg_to_send) {
                                if (DLR_IS_ENABLED(msg2->sms.dlr_mask)) {
                                        hold_service = msg2->sms.service;
                                        msg2->sms.service = 
octstr_format("%ld", msg2->sms.time);
                                        msgid = generate_smppid(msg2);
                                        if (parts_list) {
                                                msg2->sms.dlr_url = 
concat_msgids(msgid, parts_list);
                                        }
                                        dlr_add(box->boxc_id, msgid, msg2);
                                        octstr_destroy(msgid);
                                        octstr_destroy(msg2->sms.service);
                                        msg2->sms.service = hold_service;
                                }
                                uuid_unparse(msg2->sms.id, id);
                                msgid = octstr_create(id);
                                dict_put(box->msg_acks, msgid, resp);
                                octstr_destroy(msgid);
                                resp = NULL;
                                send_msg(box->bearerbox_connection, box, msg2);
                                if (parts_list) {
                                        /* destroy values */
                                        gwlist_destroy(parts_list, 
msg_destroy_item);
                                }
                        }
                        octstr_destroy(smsc_id); /* fix for this leak */
                }
                break;


This is a leak which would leak a few bytes per SMS.

signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail