[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20091008030828.GA18973@us.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 20:08:28 -0700
From: Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Daniel Lezcano <dlezcano@...ibm.com>
Cc: Pavel Emelianov <xemul@...nvz.org>,
Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@...ibm.com>,
Linux Containers <containers@...ts.osdl.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: pidns memory leak
Still digging through some traces, but below I have some questions that
I am still trying to answer.
>
> I am not sure what you mean by 'struct pids' but what I observed is:
Ok, I see that too. If pids leak, then pid-namespace will leak too.
Do you see any leaks in proc_inode_cache ?
>
> pid_2 and pid_namespace (as they are named in /proc/slabinfo) are never
> decremented.
>
>> And the pid_namespace does not seem to reproduce for me, with out the
>> 'ls -al /proc/...' above, or with the simpler 'ns_exec' approach to
>> creating pid namespace.
>
> I tried to write a simpler program but I failed to reproduce it.
>
>> I am going through the code for lxc-execute, but does it remount /proc
>> in the container ?
>
> Right, the parent does a clone(NEWMNT|NEWPID|NEWIPC|NEWUTS), wait for
> the child while this one (pid 1) 'execs' the lxc-init process. This
> program mounts /proc and fork-exec the command passed as parameter (here
> 'sleep 3600').
>
> Without this intermediate process, the leak *seems* not happening.
>
> If you don't access /proc/<pid>/<file>, the leak is not happening.
I could not see the code for that. Does lxc-stop unmount /proc too ?
Or is the umount expected to happen automatically after all processes
in the container are killed ?
Sukadev
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists