On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 02:29:04PM -0700, Daniel Verkamp wrote:
> vsocket->conn_mutex was allocated with pthread_mutex_init() but never
> freed with pthread_mutex_destroy(). This is a potential memory leak,
> depending on how pthread_mutex_t is implemented.
>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Verkamp <daniel.verk...@intel.com>
> ---
> lib/librte_vhost/socket.c | 3 +++
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/lib/librte_vhost/socket.c b/lib/librte_vhost/socket.c
> index c7f99b0..9720773 100644
> --- a/lib/librte_vhost/socket.c
> +++ b/lib/librte_vhost/socket.c
> @@ -636,6 +636,7 @@ rte_vhost_driver_register(const char *path, uint64_t
> flags)
> vsocket->reconnect = !(flags & RTE_VHOST_USER_NO_RECONNECT);
> if (vsocket->reconnect && reconn_tid == 0) {
> if (vhost_user_reconnect_init() < 0) {
> + pthread_mutex_destroy(&vsocket->conn_mutex);
> free(vsocket->path);
> free(vsocket);
> goto out;
> @@ -646,6 +647,7 @@ rte_vhost_driver_register(const char *path, uint64_t
> flags)
> }
> ret = create_unix_socket(vsocket);
> if (ret < 0) {
> + pthread_mutex_destroy(&vsocket->conn_mutex);
> free(vsocket->path);
> free(vsocket);
> goto out;
> @@ -724,6 +726,7 @@ rte_vhost_driver_unregister(const char *path)
> }
> pthread_mutex_unlock(&vsocket->conn_mutex);
>
> + pthread_mutex_destroy(&vsocket->conn_mutex);
Seems like we never do it, but shouldn't we check the return value
here?
regards,
Jens
