From: René Scharfe Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2014 11:13:30 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH] receive-pack: plug minor memory leak in unpack() Message-ID: <54439CDA.9070804@web.de> In-Reply-To: <20141014091628.GB16686@peff.net> Am 14.10.2014 um 11:16 schrieb Jeff King: > On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 12:08:09PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >>> I wonder if run-command should provide a managed env array similar >>> to the "args" array. That's a good idea. >> >> I took a look at a few of them: > > I took a brief look, too. > > I had hoped we could just all it "env" and everybody would be happy > using it instead of bare pointers. But quite a few callers assign > "local_repo_env" to to child_process.env. We could copy it into an > argv_array, of course, but that really feels like working around the > interface. So I think we would prefer to keep both forms available. We could add a flag (clear_local_repo_env?) and reference local_repo_env only in run-command.c for these cases. But some other cases remain that are better off providing their own array, like in daemon.c. > That raises the question: what should it be called? The "argv_array" > form of "argv" is called "args". The more I see it, the more I hate that > name, as the two are easily confused. We could have: > > const char **argv; > struct argv_array argv_array; > const char **env; > struct argv_array env_array; > > though "argv_array" is a lot to type when you have a string of > argv_array_pushf() calls (which are already by themselves kind of > verbose). Maybe that's not too big a deal, though. I actually like args and argv. :) Mixing them up is noticed by the compiler, so any confusion is cleared up rather quickly. > We could flip it to give the managed version the short name (and calling > the unmanaged version "env_ptr" or something). That would require > munging the existing callers, but the tweak would be simple. Perhaps, but I'm a but skeptical of big renames. Let's start small and add env_array, and see how far we get with that. >> - daemon.c::handle() uses a static set of environment variables >> that are not built with argv_array(). Same for argv. > > Most of the callers you mentioned are good candidates. This one is > tricky. > > The argv array gets malloc'd and set up by the parent git-daemon > process. Then each time we get a client, we create a new struct > child_process that references it. So using the managed argv-array would > actually be a bit more complicated (and not save any memory; we just > always point to the single copy for each child). > > For the environment, we build it in a function-local buffer, point the > child_process's env field at it, start the child, and then copy the > child_process into our global list of children. When we notice a child > is dead (by linearly going through the list with waitpid), we free the > list entry. So there are a few potentially bad things here: > > 1. We memcpy the child_process to put it on the list. Which does work, > though it feels a little like we are violating the abstraction > barrier. > > 2. The child_process in the list points to the local "env" buffer that > is no longer valid. There's no bug because we don't ever look at > it. Moving to a managed env would fix that. But I have to wonder if > we even want to be keeping the "struct child_process" around in the > first place (all we really care about is the pid). > > 3. If we do move to a managed env, then we expect it to get cleaned up > in finish_command. But we never call that; we just free the list > memory containing the child_process. We would want to call > finish_command. Except that we will have reaped the process already > with our call to waitpid() from check_dead_children. So we'd need a > new call to do just the cleanup without the wait, I guess. > > 4. For every loop on the listen socket, we call waitpid() for each > living child, which is a bit wasteful. We'd probably do better to > call waitpid(0, &status, WNOHANG), and then look up the resulting > pid in a hashmap or sorted list when we actually see something that > died. I don't know that this is a huge problem in practice. We use > git-daemon pretty heavily on our backend servers at GitHub, and it > seems to use about 5% of a CPU constantly on each machine. Which is > kind of lame, given that it isn't doing anything at all, but is > hardly earth-shattering. > > So I'm not sure if it is worth converting to a managed env. There's a > bit of ugliness, but none of it is causing any problems, and doing so > opens a can of worms. The most interesting thing to fix (to me, anyway) > is number 4, but that has nothing to do with the env in the first place. > :) Trickiness makes me nervous, especially in daemon.c. And 5% CPU usage just for waiting sounds awful. Using waitpid(0, ...) is not supported by the current implementation in compat/mingw.c, however. I agree that env handling should only be changed after the wait loop has been improved. By the way, does getaddrinfo(3) show up in your profiles much? Recently I looked into calling it only on demand instead of for all incoming connections because doing that unconditional with a user-supplied ("tainted") hostname just felt wrong. The resulting patch series turned out to be not very pretty and I didn't see any performance improvements in my very limited tests, however; not sure if it's worth it. René