On 12-02-18, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> Hey Baptiste,
> 
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 8:42 AM, Baptiste Jonglez
> <bapti...@bitsofnetworks.org> wrote:
> > Actually, now that I talk about it, it's not 100% true: on this system,
> > there is a second wireguard interface that is not currently used (it's
> > provisionned to connect a future router that is not yet deployed).
> >
> > The interesting part: this interface has a single peer which has no
> > endpoint but a persistent keepalive.

It seems to be a valid hypothesis: after I disabled persistent keepalives
on this interface (delete interface, remove persistent keepalive from
configuration, create interface again), memory usage has stopped growing:

  https://files.polyno.me/tmp/memory-leak-wireguard-annotated.png

> That's a super useful observation! I'm guessing this will fix it:
> https://git.zx2c4.com/WireGuard/commit/?id=c5c22fb9bad1807a612b6055e0049d68f4600605

Nice, thanks!  I'm looking forward to testing the next release then.

> I'm still analyzing everything to find other places where I might have
> missed something, but hopefully the above does it.

Baptiste

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
WireGuard mailing list
WireGuard@lists.zx2c4.com
https://lists.zx2c4.com/mailman/listinfo/wireguard

Reply via email to