On 2019/12/2 21:58, Laurent Vivier wrote:
> On 02/12/2019 12:15, pannengy...@huawei.com wrote:
>> From: PanNengyuan <pannengy...@huawei.com>
>>
>> ivqs/ovqs/c_ivq/c_ovq is forgot to cleanup in
>> virtio_serial_device_unrealize, the memory leak stack is as bellow:
>>
>> Direct leak of 1290240 byte(s) in 180 object(s) allocated from:
>> #0 0x7fc9bfc27560 in calloc (/usr/lib64/libasan.so.3+0xc7560)
>> #1 0x7fc9bed6f015 in g_malloc0 (/usr/lib64/libglib-2.0.so.0+0x50015)
>> #2 0x5650e02b83e7 in virtio_add_queue
>> /mnt/sdb/qemu-4.2.0-rc0/hw/virtio/virtio.c:2327
>> #3 0x5650e02847b5 in virtio_serial_device_realize
>> /mnt/sdb/qemu-4.2.0-rc0/hw/char/virtio-serial-bus.c:1089
>> #4 0x5650e02b56a7 in virtio_device_realize
>> /mnt/sdb/qemu-4.2.0-rc0/hw/virtio/virtio.c:3504
>> #5 0x5650e03bf031 in device_set_realized
>> /mnt/sdb/qemu-4.2.0-rc0/hw/core/qdev.c:876
>> #6 0x5650e0531efd in property_set_bool
>> /mnt/sdb/qemu-4.2.0-rc0/qom/object.c:2080
>> #7 0x5650e053650e in object_property_set_qobject
>> /mnt/sdb/qemu-4.2.0-rc0/qom/qom-qobject.c:26
>> #8 0x5650e0533e14 in object_property_set_bool
>> /mnt/sdb/qemu-4.2.0-rc0/qom/object.c:1338
>> #9 0x5650e04c0e37 in virtio_pci_realize
>> /mnt/sdb/qemu-4.2.0-rc0/hw/virtio/virtio-pci.c:1801
>>
>> Reported-by: Euler Robot <euler.ro...@huawei.com>
>> Signed-off-by: PanNengyuan <pannengy...@huawei.com>
>> ---
>> hw/char/virtio-serial-bus.c | 6 ++++++
>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/hw/char/virtio-serial-bus.c b/hw/char/virtio-serial-bus.c
>> index 3325904..da9019a 100644
>> --- a/hw/char/virtio-serial-bus.c
>> +++ b/hw/char/virtio-serial-bus.c
>> @@ -1126,9 +1126,15 @@ static void
>> virtio_serial_device_unrealize(DeviceState *dev, Error **errp)
>> {
>> VirtIODevice *vdev = VIRTIO_DEVICE(dev);
>> VirtIOSerial *vser = VIRTIO_SERIAL(dev);
>> + int i;
>>
>> QLIST_REMOVE(vser, next);
>>
>> + for (i = 0; i <= vser->bus.max_nr_ports; i++) {
>> + virtio_del_queue(vdev, 2 * i);
>> + virtio_del_queue(vdev, 2 * i + 1);
>> + }
>> +
>
> According to virtio_serial_device_realize() and the number of
> virtio_add_queue(), I think you have more queues to delete:
>
> 4 + 2 * vser->bus.max_nr_ports
>
> (for vser->ivqs[0], vser->ovqs[0], vser->c_ivq, vser->c_ovq,
> vser->ivqs[i], vser->ovqs[i]).
>
> Thanks,
> Laurent
>
>
Thanks, but I think the queues is correct, the queues in
virtio_serial_device_realize is as follow:
// here is 2
vser->ivqs[0] = virtio_add_queue(vdev, 128, handle_input);
vser->ovqs[0] = virtio_add_queue(vdev, 128, handle_output);
// here is 2
vser->c_ivq = virtio_add_queue(vdev, 32, control_in);
vser->c_ovq = virtio_add_queue(vdev, 32, control_out);
// here 2 * (max_nr_ports - 1) ----- i is from 1 to max_nr_ports - 1
for (i = 1; i < vser->bus.max_nr_ports; i++) {
vser->ivqs[i] = virtio_add_queue(vdev, 128, handle_input);
vser->ovqs[i] = virtio_add_queue(vdev, 128, handle_output);
}
so the total queues number is: 2 * (vser->bus.max_nr_ports + 1)
