On 5/14/19 4:01 PM, Bill Fenner wrote: > Perhaps getbulk no longer dumps core, but I can not get it to return > anything but GENERR any more, and, it seems to leak memory. > > Any "large enough" request seems to fail in this way, e.g., > snmpbulkget -v 3 ... -Cn 5 -Cr 50 sysUpTime sysUpTime sysUpTime > sysUpTime sysUpTime .1 > > This is particularly frustrating because code was added to 5.8 to > rebuild a getbulk reply if it's too big. But there was already code > to not build the PDU too big, it's just not taking the v3 header into > account properly (that's my best guess, at least). So now there are > two different mechanisms to send a "right-size" reply and they both > don't work. Around 5.8 release time I was working with Robert Story > to fix this, but that effort kind of petered out and Robert's work > didn't make it into git. > > Can anyone get getbulk to work in the current 5.8-patches with SNMPv3? > > I've attached a test script with 504 failing test cases when I run it > against an unmodified V5-8-patches branch, and net-snmp leaks about a > meg of RAM during the test. This is an adaptation of my internal test > to the net-snmp test framework; the complete test would use all > supported values for -l, -a, -x but for now this is the simplest one > using nanp.
Hi Bill, A new test has been added (testing/fulltests/default/T0221snmpbulkget_large_simple). That test passes on my setup. Can you have a look whether that test covers the issue you ran into? Regarding the "memory leak": RSS is not a reliable source of information to detect memory leaks. If you want to verify whether or not a new memory leak has been introduced please use Valgrind. Bart. _______________________________________________ Net-snmp-coders mailing list Net-snmp-coders@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders
