From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: baptiste@bitsofnetworks.org Received: from krantz.zx2c4.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by krantz.zx2c4.com (ZX2C4 Mail Server) with ESMTP id 6b191ddd for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 13:11:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mails.bitsofnetworks.org (rezine.polyno.me [193.33.56.138]) by krantz.zx2c4.com (ZX2C4 Mail Server) with ESMTP id afe77d76 for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 13:11:22 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 14:17:59 +0100 From: Baptiste Jonglez To: "Jason A. Donenfeld" Subject: Re: Memleak with 0.0.20171221-5 on Debian stretch Message-ID: <20180213131758.GA5242@lud.localdomain> References: <20180211134837.GC12558@lud.localdomain> <87r2prs80x.fsf@fifthhorseman.net> <20180211184312.GD12558@lud.localdomain> <20180212073501.GA5305@tuxmachine.localdomain> <20180212074255.GB5305@tuxmachine.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="k1lZvvs/B4yU6o8G" In-Reply-To: Cc: WireGuard mailing list List-Id: Development discussion of WireGuard List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , --k1lZvvs/B4yU6o8G Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 12-02-18, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: > Hey Baptiste, >=20 > On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 8:42 AM, Baptiste Jonglez > 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=3Dc5c22fb9bad1807a612b6055e004= 9d68f4600605 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 --k1lZvvs/B4yU6o8G Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEjVflzZuxNlVFbt5QvgHsIqBOLkYFAlqC5X4ACgkQvgHsIqBO LkaDuQ/8D5NgYfzs1K3Y5S+3oNnLqTFjgsYq8zOgfd+AKmSQ2V9HwS7Ba9dI+r89 5ptE5rVjhVBrF6armIo9lJP0WVHI+Huc9nKQpjesdhHZrS8TjYjf/A229me3eRfj 0pmpFCm771zxqwu9SZCiGZwGVJPHW+DKOMnzY6RVCawoNoPiliIFe870esDFiNj4 F9vMhy7JFORG3DZmkDgHTXajIDsbKr8dAShtiiHVSGoorYk6fQcT62X8NN/dmDMg 85pjxY1g0GqhwUTaaZ3q70y8+ioCkbzSuM1E3PkTlJKXbeMUOoJO0wgwi5qYInn3 UO8TdifC9D/3x0zmvBn4OS6q9jXvJJX7u66f6Je14DQVCmBTNMMxjwTmoxXSYU2A DsB/ziUJ4pHCanXjBx58TtOuiHC0qt25oMlBSVzdNFyAT4LQOLy45hkPjldzqZYs CIcWLtE/BIepAoN78N2eAGmE9GTVM+DrKJPp4LKifbgiZxtDrEJ+dxuq4wbl71or N9G2+8jqzk3o20e490W2LPszF+/hZQZ3RLURS1XqpBhPI4K/01VXFqls89q1+PRc agy1lFrJ5TH48ms0IbzpKIzIjUTxDNh/lB+dICHF+C4L9vPWilM1UXrTFpVfAIO+ 7Fg5v627FhpVy5okRWeDJKmhecbUQv/DOkACaPFezKi0POybUJw= =OekX -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --k1lZvvs/B4yU6o8G--