TrueCloudLab/frostfs-sdk-go
32
0
Fork 21
Code Issues 32 Pull requests 2 Releases Activity Actions

rpc: Fix mem leak again #327

Merged
dstepanov-yadro merged 1 commit from dstepanov-yadro/frostfs-sdk-go:fix/mem_leak_step2 into master 2025-01-30 11:02:44 +00:00
Conversation 1 Commits 1 Files changed 3 +40 -12
dstepanov-yadro commented 2025-01-30 07:50:18 +00:00
Member
Copy link

TBD

TBD
dstepanov-yadro added 1 commit 2025-01-30 07:50:18 +00:00
[#9999] rpc: Fix mem leak again
All checks were successful
DCO / DCO (pull_request) Successful in 27s
Details
Code generation / Generate proto (pull_request) Successful in 33s
Details
Tests and linters / Tests (pull_request) Successful in 44s
Details
Tests and linters / Lint (pull_request) Successful in 1m53s
Details
7f7539c895 
Signed-off-by: Dmitrii Stepanov <d.stepanov@yadro.com>
requested reviews from storage-core-committers, storage-core-developers, storage-services-committers, storage-services-developers 2025-01-30 07:50:18 +00:00
fyrchik approved these changes 2025-01-30 07:53:27 +00:00
Dismissed
api/rpc/client/stream_wrapper.go Outdated
@ -36,1 +38,4 @@
func (w *streamWrapper) closeSend() error {
var err error
w.closeSendOnce.Do(
fyrchik commented 2025-01-30 07:52:01 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

Why do we need once here?

Why do we need once here?
dstepanov-yadro commented 2025-01-30 08:02:21 +00:00
Author
Member
Copy link

Checked: grpc package already has call more than once protection, so dropped.

Checked: grpc package already has call more than once protection, so dropped.
api/rpc/client/stream_wrapper.go Outdated
@ -37,2 +49,3 @@
func (w *streamWrapper) Close() error {
return w.withTimeout(w.ClientStream.CloseSend)
err := w.closeSend()
w.cancel()
fyrchik commented 2025-01-30 07:53:20 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

I think we should call cancel explicitly in the clientStreamWriterCloser.Close() -- this is why using concrete type helps.

I think we should call cancel explicitly in the `clientStreamWriterCloser.Close()` -- this is why using concrete type helps.
fyrchik commented 2025-01-30 07:54:45 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

But this cancel is still needed -- we can Close() on error outside this package

But this cancel is still needed -- we can `Close()` on error outside this package
dstepanov-yadro force-pushed fix/mem_leak_step2 from 7f7539c895 to 3ed8039f60 2025-01-30 07:59:05 +00:00 Compare
dstepanov-yadro dismissed fyrchik's review 2025-01-30 07:59:06 +00:00
Reason:

New commits pushed, approval review dismissed automatically according to repository settings

aarifullin approved these changes 2025-01-30 08:08:35 +00:00
Dismissed
aarifullin left a comment
Member
Copy link

Perfect

Perfect
acid-ant approved these changes 2025-01-30 08:12:26 +00:00
Dismissed
fyrchik reviewed 2025-01-30 08:18:47 +00:00
api/rpc/client/flows.go Outdated
@ -46,2 +49,3 @@
func (c *clientStreamWriterCloser) Close() error {
err := c.MessageReadWriter.Close()
err := c.sw.closeSend()
fyrchik commented 2025-01-30 08:18:41 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

if err != nil, we probably should call cancel too.

`if err != nil`, we probably should call `cancel` too.
dstepanov-yadro commented 2025-01-30 08:55:43 +00:00
Author
Member
Copy link
	// CloseSend closes the send direction of the stream. It closes the stream <------
	// when non-nil error is met. It is also not safe to call CloseSend
	// concurrently with SendMsg.
	CloseSend() error
``` // CloseSend closes the send direction of the stream. It closes the stream <------ // when non-nil error is met. It is also not safe to call CloseSend // concurrently with SendMsg. CloseSend() error ```
image.png
19 KiB
image.png
👍 1
dstepanov-yadro commented 2025-01-30 09:05:08 +00:00
Author
Member
Copy link

fixed

fixed
fyrchik marked this conversation as resolved
api/rpc/client/flows.go Outdated
@ -53,0 +57,4 @@
return err
}
return c.sw.Close()
fyrchik commented 2025-01-30 08:18:29 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

We call Close() which calls closeSend() + cancel().
Why not just call cancel()?

We call `Close()` which calls `closeSend()` + `cancel()`. Why not just call `cancel()`?
dstepanov-yadro commented 2025-01-30 09:05:15 +00:00
Author
Member
Copy link

ok, done

ok, done
fyrchik marked this conversation as resolved
fyrchik commented 2025-01-30 08:19:34 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

The commit message is exquisite! (no).

The commit message is exquisite! (no).
dstepanov-yadro force-pushed fix/mem_leak_step2 from 3ed8039f60 to 3978bac499 2025-01-30 09:02:57 +00:00 Compare
dstepanov-yadro dismissed aarifullin's review 2025-01-30 09:02:57 +00:00
Reason:

New commits pushed, approval review dismissed automatically according to repository settings

dstepanov-yadro dismissed acid-ant's review 2025-01-30 09:02:58 +00:00
Reason:

New commits pushed, approval review dismissed automatically according to repository settings

dstepanov-yadro force-pushed fix/mem_leak_step2 from 3978bac499 to a114637e54 2025-01-30 09:05:04 +00:00 Compare
dstepanov-yadro force-pushed fix/mem_leak_step2 from a114637e54 to 12f64696df 2025-01-30 09:17:34 +00:00 Compare
dstepanov-yadro changed title from rpc: Fix mem leak again to WIP: rpc: Fix mem leak again 2025-01-30 09:22:36 +00:00
dstepanov-yadro force-pushed fix/mem_leak_step2 from 12f64696df to 593dd77d84 2025-01-30 09:54:42 +00:00 Compare
dstepanov-yadro changed title from WIP: rpc: Fix mem leak again to rpc: Fix mem leak again 2025-01-30 09:58:27 +00:00
requested reviews from storage-core-committers, storage-core-developers 2025-01-30 09:58:27 +00:00
aarifullin approved these changes 2025-01-30 10:02:09 +00:00
fyrchik approved these changes 2025-01-30 10:36:21 +00:00
dstepanov-yadro merged commit 593dd77d84 into master 2025-01-30 11:02:44 +00:00
dstepanov-yadro referenced this pull request from a commit 2025-01-30 11:02:46 +00:00
[#327] rpc: Fix mem leak
dstepanov-yadro deleted branch fix/mem_leak_step2 2025-01-30 11:02:46 +00:00
Sign in to join this conversation.
Reviewers
No reviewers
aarifullin
fyrchik
TrueCloudLab/storage-services-committers
TrueCloudLab/storage-services-developers
Labels
Clear labels   
P0

Highest

  
P1

High

  
P2

Medium

  
P3

Low

  
good first issue

Good for newcomers

  
pool

Tasks related to client pool

  
Infrastructure

Infrastructure, Automation, CI/CD or DevOps related stuff

  
blocked

The issue or PR is blocked by something

  
bug

Something is not working

  
config

Configuration format update or breaking change

  
discussion

Talking about something in order to reach a decision or to exchange ideas

  
documentation

Documentation related

  
duplicate

This issue or pull request already exists

  
enhancement

New feature

  
go

Language features adoption

  
help wanted

Extra attention is needed

  
internal

   
invalid

Something is wrong

  
kludge

This is a kludge and we know it

  
observability

Related to metrics, tracing and logs

  
perfomance

Perfomance related

  
question

More information is needed

  
refactoring

Refactoring

  
wontfix

This won't be fixed

No labels
P0
P1
P2
P3
good first issue
pool
Infrastructure
blocked
bug
config
discussion
documentation
duplicate
enhancement
go
help wanted
internal
invalid
kludge
observability
perfomance
question
refactoring
wontfix
Milestone
Clear milestone
No items
No milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No items
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
No assignees
4 participants
Notifications
Due date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: TrueCloudLab/frostfs-sdk-go#327
No description provided.
Delete branch "dstepanov-yadro/frostfs-sdk-go:fix/mem_leak_step2"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?