I did this by calling __lxc_start(). So, lxc_check_inherited() didn't get called. That was this: > If I call __lxc_start() rather than lxc_start(), I see this: > vdr1: sync wake failure : Broken pipe > vdr1: failed to spawn 'vdr1' > And, just before that there is some complaining from valgrind: > ==25086== Syscall param clone(child_tidptr) contains uninitialised byte(s) > ==25086== at 0x56622E1: clone (clone.S:84) > ==25086== by 0x4E3BD38: __lxc_start (in /usr/lib/lxc/liblxc.so.0.7.5) > ==25086== by 0x4014C9: vgVdrStartClone (vgVdrTest.c:88) > ==25086== by 0x400F0A: main (vgVdrTest.c:337) > ==25086== > ==1== Syscall param wait4(status) points to unaddressable byte(s) > ==1== at 0x53607C4: wait (wait.c:32) > ==1== by 0x4E3A400: ??? (in /usr/lib/lxc/liblxc.so.0.7.5) > ==1== by 0x566231C: clone (clone.S:112) > ==1== Address 0xffffffffffffffd4 is not stack'd, malloc'd or (recently) > free'd > ==1== > ==1== Invalid write of size 4 > ==1== at 0x4E3A4FF: ??? (in /usr/lib/lxc/liblxc.so.0.7.5) > ==1== by 0x566231C: clone (clone.S:112) > ==1== Address 0xffffffffffffffc0 is not stack'd, malloc'd or (recently) > free'd > ==1== > ==1== > ==1== Process terminating with default action of signal 11 (SIGSEGV) > ==1== Access not within mapped region at address 0xFFFFFFFFFFFFFFC0 > ==1== at 0x4E3A4FF: ??? (in /usr/lib/lxc/liblxc.so.0.7.5) > ==1== by 0x566231C: clone (clone.S:112)
Regards. Mark K Vallevand "If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went." -Will Rogers THIS COMMUNICATION MAY CONTAIN CONFIDENTIAL AND/OR OTHERWISE PROPRIETARY MATERIAL and is thus for use only by the intended recipient. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the e-mail and its attachments from all computers. -----Original Message----- From: lxc-users [mailto:lxc-users-boun...@lists.linuxcontainers.org] On Behalf Of Serge Hallyn Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2014 04:18 PM To: LXC users mailing-list Cc: valgrind-users@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [lxc-users] Using valgrind with lxc Hi, For the sake of testing I'd go ahead and just 'return 0' at the top of lxc_check_inherited. We can talk about adding an option to do this, i.e. lxc.close_all_fds = -1 maybe. It's a very rare case where that should be done, though. -serge Quoting Vallevand, Mark K (mark.vallev...@unisys.com): > Valgrind meet containers. > Containers meet valgrind. > > I've found what lxc doesn't like when running valgrind. > > The lxc_start() checks to see if there are extra file descriptors open and > won't call __lxc_start(). > vdr1: inherited fd 1024 on > /home/vallevand/trunk_s4m/s4m-appliance/src/vdrd/vgVdrTest > vdr1: inherited fd 1025 on /tmp/valgrind_proc_24989_cmdline_4fbfb9a5 > (deleted)VdrTest > vdr1: inherited fd 1026 on /dev/pts/1ind_proc_24989_cmdline_4fbfb9a5 > (deleted)VdrTest > vdr1: inherited fd 1027 on pipe:[768863]_proc_24989_cmdline_4fbfb9a5 > (deleted)VdrTest > vdr1: inherited fd 1028 on pipe:[768863]_proc_24989_cmdline_4fbfb9a5 > (deleted)VdrTest > > Vdr1 is the name of my container. All those open files in the child process > are related to valgrind. > > If I call __lxc_start() rather than lxc_start(), I see this: > vdr1: sync wake failure : Broken pipe > vdr1: failed to spawn 'vdr1' > And, just before that there is some complaining from valgrind: > ==25086== Syscall param clone(child_tidptr) contains uninitialised byte(s) > ==25086== at 0x56622E1: clone (clone.S:84) > ==25086== by 0x4E3BD38: __lxc_start (in /usr/lib/lxc/liblxc.so.0.7.5) > ==25086== by 0x4014C9: vgVdrStartClone (vgVdrTest.c:88) > ==25086== by 0x400F0A: main (vgVdrTest.c:337) > ==25086== > ==1== Syscall param wait4(status) points to unaddressable byte(s) > ==1== at 0x53607C4: wait (wait.c:32) > ==1== by 0x4E3A400: ??? (in /usr/lib/lxc/liblxc.so.0.7.5) > ==1== by 0x566231C: clone (clone.S:112) > ==1== Address 0xffffffffffffffd4 is not stack'd, malloc'd or (recently) > free'd > ==1== > ==1== Invalid write of size 4 > ==1== at 0x4E3A4FF: ??? (in /usr/lib/lxc/liblxc.so.0.7.5) > ==1== by 0x566231C: clone (clone.S:112) > ==1== Address 0xffffffffffffffc0 is not stack'd, malloc'd or (recently) > free'd > ==1== > ==1== > ==1== Process terminating with default action of signal 11 (SIGSEGV) > ==1== Access not within mapped region at address 0xFFFFFFFFFFFFFFC0 > ==1== at 0x4E3A4FF: ??? (in /usr/lib/lxc/liblxc.so.0.7.5) > ==1== by 0x566231C: clone (clone.S:112) > > Our program is designed to close all open file descriptors in the child > process before calling lxc_start(). That code can try to close all file > descriptors to make sure something doesn't sneak through. However, closing > the file descriptors associated with valgrind does not work. I get errno=0 > Bad File Descriptor. Valgrind really has them held open. I am running as > root in all these tests. > > I've also reproduced the problem using the 'lxc-' programs. If you do > something like 'lxc-create -n XXX' and then something like 'valgrind > lxc-start -n XXX -- ls' you'll see it. Well, the flavor of the error with > open file descriptors. > > My hopes aren't high, but any ideas are very welcome. > > Regards. > Mark K Vallevand > "If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they > went." > -Will Rogers > > THIS COMMUNICATION MAY CONTAIN CONFIDENTIAL AND/OR OTHERWISE PROPRIETARY > MATERIAL and is thus for use only by the intended recipient. If you received > this in error, please contact the sender and delete the e-mail and its > attachments from all computers. > From: lxc-users [mailto:lxc-users-boun...@lists.linuxcontainers.org] On > Behalf Of Vallevand, Mark K > Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2014 09:19 AM > To: lxc-us...@lists.linuxcontainers.org > Subject: [lxc-users] Using valgrind with lxc > > In our program, we do a fork() and in the child process the lxc library is > called to start a program in a container using lxc_start(). > > We don't care about valgrind in the child process. You can disable valgrind > messages from child processes, but you cannot detach valgrind unless you > exec() a new binary on top. However, valgrind and lxc do not play nicely, at > least with the versions in Ubuntu 12.04 LTS. I'm getting an error back from > lxc_start(). I'm having trouble getting logs to see why its failing, so I > don't know exactly what's failing, yet. > > But, I'm looking for any ideas for getting valgrind to work with programs > that use lxc_start(). > Any suggestions will be welcome. And, thanks! > > > Regards. > Mark K Vallevand > "If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they > went." > -Will Rogers > > THIS COMMUNICATION MAY CONTAIN CONFIDENTIAL AND/OR OTHERWISE PROPRIETARY > MATERIAL and is thus for use only by the intended recipient. If you received > this in error, please contact the sender and delete the e-mail and its > attachments from all computers. > _______________________________________________ > lxc-users mailing list > lxc-us...@lists.linuxcontainers.org > http://lists.linuxcontainers.org/listinfo/lxc-users _______________________________________________ lxc-users mailing list lxc-us...@lists.linuxcontainers.org http://lists.linuxcontainers.org/listinfo/lxc-users ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Meet PCI DSS 3.0 Compliance Requirements with EventLog Analyzer Achieve PCI DSS 3.0 Compliant Status with Out-of-the-box PCI DSS Reports Are you Audit-Ready for PCI DSS 3.0 Compliance? Download White paper Comply to PCI DSS 3.0 Requirement 10 and 11.5 with EventLog Analyzer http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=154622311&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ Valgrind-users mailing list Valgrind-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/valgrind-users
