[tproxy] sockref leak problem

[Daniel]

>>On Tue, 2007-06-12 at 11:21 +0800, Daniel wrote:
>> >>On Sun, 2007-06-10 at 20:25 +0800, Daniel wrote:
>> >> hi,
>> >> 
>> >> Recently I tested tproxy with Avanlanche (about 800M/s stress) and some result below:
>> >> 
>> >> 1. deadlock when ip_conntrack_ftp loaded. Plz see my last post and explaination from Balazs Scheidler.
>> >> 2. I tested again without nat_reservation(deadlock disappeared). After 10 hours' stress test, kernel kept giving out exactly the same messages repeatedly:
>> >> 
>> >> IP_TPROXY: socket already assigned, reuse=1, 0a0ba8c0:4c86, sr->faddr=e80ba8c0:0000, flags=10000, sr->tv_hashed=1181425010:475244912
>> >> 
>> >> My questions:
>> >>   Is this sockref leaked?
>> >>   and, what is the situation when a sockref is leaked?
>> >
>> >can you tell me your kernel/tproxy version?
>> >
>> >The error message above means that the application tries to an address
>> >that already is in the tproxy hash table (e.g. which was allocated
>> >before). This should never happen, as this would indicate that
>> >you have two sockets bound to the same local ip:port
>> >
>> >The details of the already registered entry is included in the log
>> >message.
>> >
>> >The conflicting local address is 192.168.11.10:34380 and you wanted to
>> >assign 192.168.11.232 with a random port (0 port).
>> >
>> >Your flags has ITP_ONCE set, and nothing else, and the entry in the
>> >table was registered at 1181425010.475 secs after the UNIX epoch.
>> >
>> >A minor note:
>> >* ITP_ONCE was removed from the latest versions of tproxy, you should
>> >not use that (I don't think removing that would help in your case
>> >however)
>> >
>> >Please give me the exact versions you are testing with.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >-- 
>> >Bazsi
>> >
>> >
>> Sorry about my last encoded email.
>> 
>> I use tproxy-2.0.1 and kernel 2.6.9 and a http proxy, and I cann't move forward to new 
>> versions for some reason.
>> 
>> 
>> Today when I stop stress and check /proc/net/tproxy later, I found 3 entries always there:
>> cat /proc/net/tproxy 
>> 00006 470ba8c0:0000 0a0ba8c0:0581 00000000:0000 00010000 00000 000001 1181498811:997708128
>> 00006 700ba8c0:0000 0a0ba8c0:5a9e 00000000:0000 00010000 00000 000001 1181489066:124306088
>> 00006 e80ba8c0:0000 0a0ba8c0:4c86 00000000:0000 00010000 00000 000001 1181425010:475244912
>
>The process which opened these sockets were killed or is it still
>running?
>
>-- 
>Bazsi
>
>
hi,

I think it's the http proxy who initialized these sockets, and it was still running then.

regards
				 
¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡Daniel
¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡tooldcas at 163.com
¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡2007-06-20