前几天有同学反馈了 cgo 内存泄露问题,自己也针对这个问题探索了一番,算是为以后解决类似问题提前攒点经验吧。也趁机整理了一下 go 开发过程中内存泄露问题的一些常用排查方法,也希望对新接触 go 的同学有所帮助。整理之余,bcc 工具之丰富也让我有点惊讶,也希望对自己日后的工作有所帮助吧。
内存泄漏
内存泄露,一个老生常谈的问题,但即便是老手也会犯一些低级错误。如果没有可靠的研发流程保证在测试阶段发现问题,问题就容易被带到线上。计算资源始终是有限的,问题也不会因为资源充裕就消失不见,产生影响只是时间问题。影响有多大,就要结合场景来说了。
内存泄漏,最可能的影响就是内存申请失败。但实际上操作系统更聪明,结合系统整体负载情况,它会为每个进程计算一个 oom_score,并在内存资源紧张时选择一个合适的进程杀死并回收内存资源,see 。
/proc/messages
服务质量
结合运维手段的变化,来看看是否内存泄漏问题对服务质量造成的影响。
- 传统人工方式,通过感知告警、人为介入这种方式,效率低,要十几分钟;
- 通过虚拟机自动化部署的方式,感知异常自动重启虚拟机,耗时大约要分钟级;
- 通过 docker 容器化部署的方式,感知异常自动重启容器,耗时大约在秒级;
看上去现代运维方式一定程度上可以缓解这个问题,是,这也要分情况:
- 如果内存泄露的代码路径不容易被触发,那可能要跑很久才能触发 oom kill,如一周;但是如果代码路径在关键代码路径上,且请求量大,频繁触发内存泄露,那可能跑个几分钟就会挂掉;
- 跟每次内存泄露的内存大小也有关系,如果泄露的少,多苟活一阵子,反之容易暴毙;
- 进程一旦挂掉,这段时间就不能响应了,服务的健康监测、名字服务、负载均衡等措施需要一段时间才能感知到,如果请求量大,服务不可用依然会带来比较大的影响。
服务质量保证是不变的,所以别管用了什么运维手段,问题终究是问题,也是要解决的。
Go 内存泄漏
垃圾回收
自动内存管理减轻了开发人员管理内存的复杂性,不需要像 C\C++开发者那样显示 malloc、free,或者 new、delete。垃圾回收借助于一些垃圾回收算法完成对无用内存的清理,垃圾回收算法有很多,比如:引用计数、标记清除、拷贝、分代等等。
Go 中垃圾回收器采用的是“并发三色标记清除”算法,see:
Go 语言支持自动内存管理,那还存在内存泄漏问题吗?
理论上,垃圾回收(gc)算法能够对堆内存进行有效的清理,这个是没什么可质疑的。但是要理解,垃圾回收能够正常运行的前提是,程序中必须解除对内存的引用,这样垃圾回收才会将其判定为可回收内存并回收。
内存泄漏场景
实际情况是,编码中确实存在一些场景,会造成“临时性”或者“永久性”内存泄露,是需要开发人员加深对编程语言设计实现、编译器特性的理解之后才能优化掉的,see:。
即便是临时性内存泄漏,考虑到有限的内存资源、内存申请大小、申请频率、释放频率因素,也会造成进程 oom killed 的结果。所以,开发人员对待每一行代码还是要心存敬畏,对待内存资源也还是要慎重。
常见的内存泄露场景,go101 进行了讨论,总结了如下几种:
简单归纳一下,还是“临时性”内存泄露和“永久性”内存泄露:
for-loopchan select-case
内存泄露排查
初步怀疑程序存在内存泄露问题,可能是因为进程 oom killed,或者是因为 top 显示内存占用持续增加无法稳定在一个合理值。不管如何发现的,明确存在这一问题之后,就需要及时选择合适的方法定位到问题的根源,并及时修复。
借助 pprof 排查
pprof 类型
go 提供了 pprof 工具方便对运行中的 go 程序进行采样分析,支持对多种类型的采样分析:
- goroutine - stack traces of all current goroutines
- heap - a sampling of all heap allocations
- threadcreate - stack traces that led to the creation of new OS threads
- block - stack traces that led to blocking on synchronization primitives
- mutex - stack traces of holders of contended mutexes
- profile - cpu profile
- trace - allows collecting all the profiles for a certain duration
pprof 操作
/debug/pprof
集成 pprof 非常简单,只需要在工程中引入如下代码即可:
import _ "net/http/pprof"
go func() {
log.Println(http.ListenAndServe("localhost:6060", nil))
}()
go tool pprof
go tool pprof -seconds=10 -http=:9999 http://localhost:6060/debug/pprof/heap
有时可能存在网络隔离问题,不能直接从开发机访问测试机、线上机器,或者测试机、线上机器没有安装 go,那也可以这么做:
curl http://localhost:6060/debug/pprof/heap?seconds=30 > heap.out
# sz下载heap.out到本地
go tool pprof heap.out
go tool pprof 可以收集两类采样数据:
- in_use,收集进程当前仍在使用中的内存;
- alloc,收集自进程启动后的总的内存分配情况,包括已经释放掉的内存;
![image-20210428161159419](/Users/suke/Library/Application Support/typora-user-images/image-20210428161159419.png)
go tool pprof 展示采样信息时,申请内存以“红色”显示,释放内存以“绿色”显示。
允许采样完成后打开一个浏览器页面(通过 ip:port 访问),交互式地查看采样结果信息,例如 callgraph、flamegraph、top 信息。
pprof 示例:协程泄露
![](/Users/suke/Library/Application Support/typora-user-images/image-20210428161212115.png)
runtime.malg
此时根据上述 callgraph 中的线索检查程序中启动 goroutine 的地方,以及 goroutine 是否有正常退出的逻辑保证,就能比较方便地定位到泄露原因了。
-diff_base
go tool pprof -http=':8081' \
-diff_base heap-new-16:22:04:N.out \
heap-new-17:32:38:N.out
runtime.malg
由 pprof heap 确定了存在 goroutine 泄露问题,但我们还不知道此 goroutine 在何处启动的,为此,我们继续 pprof goroutine。
go tool pprof -seconds=10 \
-http=:8081 \
http://localhost:6060/debug/pprof/goroutines
![image-20210428161238043](/Users/suke/Library/Application Support/typora-user-images/image-20210428161238043.png)
现在通过上述 callgraph 我们很容易定位到 goroutine 是在哪里启动的了,回到源码中进一步确认:
var ticker = time.NewTicker(time.Second)
go func() {
for {
select {
case <-ticker.C:
// doSomething
}
}
}()
func somefunc(...) {
ticker.Stop()
}
time.Ticker.Stop()
var ticker = time.NewTicker(time.Second)
var chdone = make(chan int, 1)
go func() {
for {
select {
case <-ticker.C:
sa.read()
case <- chdone:
return
}
}
}()
func somefunc(...) {
ticker.Stop()
close(chdone)
}
这里介绍了 pprof 的使用方法,pprof 是每个 go 开发人员都应该掌握的。希望读者借助这里的示例能帮助读者了解 pprof 的操作、分析过程,达到灵活运用的程度还需要日常开发工作中多实践。
借助 bcc 排查
pprof:这个我干不了
pprof 对于分析纯 go 程序是非常有帮助的,但是对于 cgo 有点无能为力,cgo 部分的代码已经跳出了 go 内存分配器的范围,采样也没用,那 cgo 部分出现内存泄露该如何排查呢?
- 要确定进程是否出现了内存泄露,可以观察进程运行期间的内存占用情况,如借助 top、free -m,或者其他运维平台的监控系统,一般 k8s 都集成了 prometheus 对容器运行情况进行了监视。如果内存占用随着时间延长一直增长,没有在合理的内存占用值附近稳定下来,或者已经出现了 oom killed、容器重启的问题出现,则可以初步判定进程存在内存泄露;
- 继续借助 pprof 工具排查 go 程序,如果 pprof 可以排查出明显的内存泄露问题,则内存泄漏问题可能是纯 go 部分代码引起,采用前面描述的分析、定位方法来解决;
- 如果 pprof 工具采样之后,没有发现明显的内存泄露的端倪,且程序中存在 cgo 部分的代码,怀疑 cgo 部分的代码存在内存泄露,此时则需借助其他手段(pprof 无能为力了)来进一步分析 cgo 部分的可能异常;
库函数:hook 库函数
要分析内存是否存在泄漏,也可以考虑自己 hook 一下库函数,自己实现这种我们就不展开讨论了。还是看看有没有趁手的好工具,能实实在在地、靠谱地帮我们解决实际问题(尽管趁手的工具也可能也是基于某种 hook 的能力实现的)。
Kernel:谁能逃脱我的法眼
内存分配操作,一般会借助一些库函数来完成,内存分配器也会做一些分配算法的优化,这里不关心这些,最终的内存申请操作还是要由操作系统来代劳,而请求内核服务的操作则是通过系统调用。
操作系统提供了一些服务,允许对运行中的进程进行观测,以 Linux 为例,借助 ptrace 系统调用+PTRACE_SYSCALL,允许我们对一个运行中的进程执行的所有系统调用进行观测,ltrace、strace 就是在此基础上实现的。
eBPF(extended BPF)的前辈是 BPF(Berkeley Packet Filtering),BPF 是一个 ByteCode VM,它的数据模型限制于 packet,经常用来做一些包分析,经典的如 tcpdump。eBPF 相比 BPF,其数据模型不再受限于单一的 packet,也不再只是用来分析 packet 的单一功能,可以利用它将 eBPF program 挂到任意的 tracepoint 或者 kprobe 去执行分析处理。这一下子打开了 eBPF 的万花筒,使得能够对内核各个子系统做观测、做性能分析,等等。
各种测量、性能分析工具,真是亮瞎我的眼睛。
BCC (eBPF toolkit):测量、性能分析
如何基于 eBPF 写 eBPF program 来完成希望的测量、分析呢,see :
BCC is a toolkit for creating efficient kernel tracing and manipulation programs, and includes several useful tools and examples. It makes use of extended BPF (Berkeley Packet Filters), formally known as eBPF, a new feature that was first added to Linux 3.15.
eBPF was Ingo Molnár as:
One of the more interesting features in this cycle is the ability to attach eBPF programs (user-defined, sandboxed bytecode executed by the kernel) to kprobes. This allows user-defined instrumentation on a live kernel image that can never crash, hang or interfere with the kernel negatively.
BCC makes BPF programs easier to write, with kernel instrumentation in C (and includes a C wrapper around LLVM), and front-ends in Python and lua. It is suited for many tasks, including performance analysis and network traffic control.
BCC 算是一个开发套件,在它基础上开发 eBPF program 会更简单,该仓库内当前已经拥有了非常丰富的测量、分析工具,工具之丰富,只差我能不能全部掌握了,也想成为像一样的性能分析专家。
Brendan Gregg: Understanding all the Linux tracers to make a rational decision between them a huge undertaking. (I may be the only person who has come close to doing this.)
至于如何实现一个 BCC 工具,则非常简单,实际上就是写一个 python 文件,内部一个字符串包含一个 c 程序,c 程序内调用封装的 eBPF API,看一个简单的 demo:
#file: hello-open-world-1.py
from bcc import BPF
program = """
#include <asm/ptrace.h> // for struct pt_regs
#include <linux/types.h> // for mode_t
int kprobe__sys_open(struct pt_regs *ctx,
char __user* pathname, int flags, mode_t mode) {
bpf_trace_printk("sys_open called.\\n");
return 0;
}
"""
b = BPF(text=program)
b.trace_print()
运行它:
$ sudo python hello-open-world-1.py
OK,BCC 套件里面提供了工具 memleak,用来对内存泄露进行分析,下面结合一个 cgo 内存泄露的示例分析,来了解下如何是使用。
建议能花点时间了解下 linux tracing systems,see ,理清下 kprobe/uprobe/dtrace probes/kernel tracepoints 的含义及工作原理,进而才能认识到 eBPF 的强大之处,不再展开了,看个示例。
BCC:内存泄露示例
下面先看一个 cgo 示例工程是如何组织的,示例项目取自https://github.com/2Dou/cgo-example,您可以直接从这里下载。
c-so/
├── Makefile
├── add
│ ├── Makefile
│ ├── add.go
│ └── src
│ ├── add.c
│ └── add.h
└── main.go
Add(a, b int) intint add(int, int)
./c-soLD_LIBRARY_PATH=$LD_LIBRARY_PATH:$(pwd -p) ./c-so
OK,现在简单地篡改下 src/add.c,将其内容修改如下,插入了一段不停申请内存的代码:
#include "add.h"
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <unistd.h>
int add(int a, int b) {
/******* insert memory leakage start ********/
int i = 0;
int max = 0x7fffffff;
for (; i<max; i++) {
int *p = (int *)malloc(sizeof(int) * 8);
sleep(1);
if (i % 2 == 0) {
free(p)
}
}
/******* insert memory leakage end ********/
return a+b;
}
现在重新执行 make 编译之后,再次运行,程序不断地 malloc 但是从来不 free,内存一点点被泄露,现在我们看看如何借助 memleak 分析内存泄露的位置:
$ /usr/share/bcc/tools/memleak -p $(pid of c-so)
运行一段时间以后,memleak 报告了内存分配的情况,显示的是“top10 的还没有释放的内存分配”的位置信息:
Trace outstanding memory allocations that weren't freed.
Supports both user-mode allocations made with libc functions and kernel-mode allocations made with kmalloc/kmem_cache_alloc/get_free_pages and corresponding memory release functions.
从 memleak 报告的最后一条信息来看:
sizeof(int)*8
memleak -h
$ /usr/share/bcc/tools/memleak -p $(pid of c-so) -t
现在可以看到报告信息中包含了 alloc entered/exited,free entered/exited,可以断定 memleak 也跟踪了内存释放,但是这里的报告还是不够直观,能否直接显示泄露的内存信息呢?可以但是要稍微修改下,下面看下实现,你会发现现有的报告信息也不妨碍分析。
bcc/memleak 实现
不看下源码,总感觉心里有点虚,看下 memleak 这个 eBPF program 中的部分逻辑:
跟踪 malloc:
int malloc_enter(struct pt_regs *ctx, size_t size)
\-> static inline int gen_alloc_enter(struct pt_regs *ctx, size_t size)
: 内部会更新被观测进程已分配的内存数量(sizes记录)
int malloc_exit(struct pt_regs *ctx)
\-> static inline int gen_alloc_exit(struct pt_regs *ctx)
\-> static inline int gen_alloc_exit2(struct pt_regs *ctx, u64 address)
:内部会记录当前申请的内存地址(allocs记录)
\-> stack_traces.get_stackid(ctx, STACK_FLAGS)
:记录当前内存分配动作的调用栈信息(allocs中记录)
跟踪 free:
int free_enter(struct pt_regs *ctx, void *address)
\-> static inline int gen_free_enter(struct pt_regs *ctx, void *address)
:从allocs中删除已经释放的内存地址
memleak 周期性地对 allocs 进行排序,并按照 sizes 分配内存多少降序排列打印出来,因为 memleak 同时跟踪了 malloc、free,所以一段时间后,周期性打印的内存分配调用栈位置,即可以认为是没有释放掉(泄露掉)的内存分配位置。
借助 pmap/gdb 排查
这也是一种比较通用的排查方式,在排查内存泄露问题时,根据实际情况(比如环境问题无法安装 go,bcc 之类分析工具等等)甚至可考虑先通过 pmap 这种方式来分析一下。总之,灵活选择合适的方式吧。
内存及 pmap 基础
进程中的内存区域分类可以按下面几个维度来划分,如果对这个不熟,建议参考以下文章,see:
Private | Shared |
---|
借助 pmap 可以查看进程内存空间分布情况,包括地址范围、大小、内存映射情况,如:
$ pmap -p <pid> # /proc/<pid>/maps
3009: ./blah
0000000000400000 4K r-x-- /home/fruneau/blah
0000000000401000 4K rw--- /home/fruneau/blah
00007fbb5da87000 51200K rw-s- /dev/zero (deleted)
00007fbb60c87000 1536K r-x-- /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc-2.13.so
00007fbb60e07000 2048K ----- /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc-2.13.so
00007fbb61007000 16K r---- /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc-2.13.so
00007fbb6100b000 4K rw--- /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc-2.13.so
00007fbb6100c000 20K rw--- [ anon ]
00007fbb61011000 128K r-x-- /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/ld-2.13.so
00007fbb61221000 12K rw--- [ anon ]
00007fbb6122e000 8K rw--- [ anon ]
00007fbb61230000 4K r---- /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/ld-2.13.so
00007fbb61231000 4K rw--- /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/ld-2.13.so
00007fbb61232000 4K rw--- [ anon ]
00007fff9350f000 132K rw--- [ stack ]
00007fff9356e000 4K r-x-- [ anon ]
ffffffffff600000 4K r-x-- [ anon ]
total 55132K
$ pmap -x -p <pid> # /proc/<pid>/smaps
Address Kbytes RSS Dirty Mode Mapping
0000000000400000 4 4 4 r-x-- blah
0000000000401000 4 4 4 rw--- blah
00007fc3b50df000 51200 51200 51200 rw-s- zero (deleted)
00007fc3b82df000 1536 188 0 r-x-- libc-2.13.so
00007fc3b845f000 2048 0 0 ----- libc-2.13.so
00007fc3b865f000 16 16 16 r---- libc-2.13.so
00007fc3b8663000 4 4 4 rw--- libc-2.13.so
00007fc3b8664000 20 12 12 rw--- [ anon ]
00007fc3b8669000 128 108 0 r-x-- ld-2.13.so
00007fc3b8879000 12 12 12 rw--- [ anon ]
00007fc3b8886000 8 8 8 rw--- [ anon ]
00007fc3b8888000 4 4 4 r---- ld-2.13.so
00007fc3b8889000 4 4 4 rw--- ld-2.13.so
00007fc3b888a000 4 4 4 rw--- [ anon ]
00007fff7e6ef000 132 12 12 rw--- [ stack ]
00007fff7e773000 4 4 0 r-x-- [ anon ]
ffffffffff600000 4 0 0 r-x-- [ anon ]
---------------- ------ ------ ------
total kB 55132 51584 51284
上述命令只是输出信息的详细程度不同,在我们理解了进程的内存类型、pmap 的使用之后,就可以对发生内存泄露的程序进行一定的分析。
排查示例:用例准备
比如现在写一个测试用的程序,目录结构如下:
leaks
|-- conf
| `-- load.go
|-- go.mod
|-- leaks
|-- main.go
`-- task
`-- load.go
file: main.go,该文件启动 conf、task 下的两个逻辑,conf.LoadConfig 中启动一个循环,每次申请 1KB 内存并全部设置为字符 C,task.NewTask 启动一个循环,每次申请 1KB 内存并设置为字符 T。 conf.LoadConfig 循环体每次迭代间隔 1s,task.NewTask 循环体每次迭代间隔 2s。
package main
import (
"leaks/conf"
"leaks/task"
)
func main() {
conf.LoadConfig("aaa")
task.NewTask("bbb")
select {}
}
file: conf/load.go:
package conf
import (
"time"
)
type Config struct {
A string
B string
C string
}
func LoadConfig(fp string) (*Config, error) {
kb := 1 << 10
go func() {
for {
p := make([]byte, kb, kb)
for i := 0; i < kb; i++ {
p[i] = 'C'
}
time.Sleep(time.Second * 1)
println("conf")
}
}()
return &Config{}, nil
}
file: task/load.go
package task
import (
"time"
)
type Task struct {
A string
B string
C string
}
func NewTask(name string) (*Task, error) {
kb := 1 << 10
// start async process
go func() {
for {
p := make([]byte, kb, kb)
for i := 0; i < kb; i++ {
p[i] = 'T'
}
time.Sleep(time.Second * 2)
println("task")
}
}()
return &Task{}, nil
}
go buildleaks
GOGC=off ./leaks
top -p $(pidof leaks)
排查示例:搜索可疑内存区
比如,你发现有段 anon 内存区域,它的占用内存数量在增加,或者这样的区段数量再增加(可以对比前后两次的 pmap 输出来发现):
$ pmap -x $(pidof leaks) > 1.txt
$ pmap -x $(pidof leaks) > 2.txt
86754: ./leaks/leaks 86754: ./leaks/leaks
Address Kbytes RSS Dirty Mode Mapping Address Kbytes RSS Dirty Mode Mapping
0000000000400000 372 372 0 r-x-- leaks 0000000000400000 372 372 0 r-x-- leaks
000000000045d000 496 476 0 r---- leaks 000000000045d000 496 476 0 r---- leaks
00000000004d9000 16 16 16 rw--- leaks 00000000004d9000 16 16 16 rw--- leaks
00000000004dd000 176 36 36 rw--- [ anon ] 00000000004dd000 176 36 36 rw--- [ anon ]
000000c000000000 131072 98508 98508 rw--- [ anon ] | 000000c000000000 131072 104652 104652 rw--- [ anon ]
00007f26010ad000 39816 3236 3236 rw--- [ anon ] | 00007f26010ad000 39816 3432 3432 rw--- [ anon ]
00007f260378f000 263680 0 0 ----- [ anon ] 00007f260378f000 263680 0 0 ----- [ anon ]
00007f261390f000 4 4 4 rw--- [ anon ] 00007f261390f000 4 4 4 rw--- [ anon ]
00007f2613910000 293564 0 0 ----- [ anon ] 00007f2613910000 293564 0 0 ----- [ anon ]
00007f26257bf000 4 4 4 rw--- [ anon ] 00007f26257bf000 4 4 4 rw--- [ anon ]
00007f26257c0000 36692 0 0 ----- [ anon ] 00007f26257c0000 36692 0 0 ----- [ anon ]
00007f2627b95000 4 4 4 rw--- [ anon ] 00007f2627b95000 4 4 4 rw--- [ anon ]
00007f2627b96000 4580 0 0 ----- [ anon ] 00007f2627b96000 4580 0 0 ----- [ anon ]
00007f262800f000 4 4 4 rw--- [ anon ] 00007f262800f000 4 4 4 rw--- [ anon ]
00007f2628010000 508 0 0 ----- [ anon ] 00007f2628010000 508 0 0 ----- [ anon ]
00007f262808f000 384 44 44 rw--- [ anon ] 00007f262808f000 384 44 44 rw--- [ anon ]
00007ffcdd81c000 132 12 12 rw--- [ stack ] 00007ffcdd81c000 132 12 12 rw--- [ stack ]
00007ffcdd86d000 12 0 0 r---- [ anon ] 00007ffcdd86d000 12 0 0 r---- [ anon ]
00007ffcdd870000 8 4 0 r-x-- [ anon ] 00007ffcdd870000 8 4 0 r-x-- [ anon ]
ffffffffff600000 4 0 0 r-x-- [ anon ] ffffffffff600000 4 0 0 r-x-- [ anon ]
---------------- ------- ------- ------- ---------------- ------- ------- -------
total kB 771528 102720 101868 | total kB 771528 109060 108208
000000c00000000000007f26010ad000
找到可疑内存区域之后,就尝试里面的内容导出,导出后再借助 strings、hexdump 等工具进行分析,通常会打印出一些字符串相关的信息,一般这些信息会帮我们联想起,这些数据大约对应着程序中的哪些数据结构、代码逻辑。
gdb -p $(pidof leaks)
gdb> dump binary memory leaks.p1 0x000000c000000000 0x000000c000000000+131072*1024
gdb> dump binary memory leaks.p2 0x00007f26010ad000 0x00007f26010ad000+39816*1024
然后尝试用 strings 或者 hexdump
$ strings leaks.p1
...
e[0;34m\]\W\[$(git_color)\]$(git_branch) \[\e[0;37m\]$\[\e[0m\]
SXPFD
EXPF
e[0;34m\]\W\[$(git_color)\]$(git_branch) \[\e[0;37m\]$\[\e[0m\]
SXPFD
EXPF
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT...CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC...TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT....CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC...TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC...TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC...TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
...
or
$ hexdump -C leaks.p1
...
0008e030 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 08 9d f0 00 35 43 00 00 |............5C..|
0008e040 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 |................|
0008e050 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 |................|
*
00090000 00 e0 08 00 c0 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 |................|
00090010 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 |................|
*
00100000 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 |TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT|
*
00200000 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 |CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC|
*
00400000 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 |TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT|
*
00500000 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 |CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC|
*
00700000 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 |TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT|
*
00800000 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 |CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC|
*
00a00000 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 |TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT|
*
00b00000 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 |CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC|
*
00d00000 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 |TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT|
*
00e00000 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 |CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC|
*
01000000 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 |TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT|
*
...
CCCCCCCTTTTTTTTT
使用 gcore 转储整个进程,原理类似,gcore 会在转储完后立即 detach 进程,比手动 dump 速度快,对 traced 进程的影响时间短,但是转储文件一般比较大(记得 ulimit -c 设置下),core 文件使用 hexdump 分析的时候也可以选择性跳过一些字节,以分析感兴趣的可疑内存区。
其他方式
内存泄露的排查方式有很多,工具也有很多,比如比较有名的 valgrind,但是我测试过程中,valgrind 没有像 bcc 那样精确地定位到内存泄露的位置,可能是我的使用方式有问题。see ,感兴趣的可以自己研究下。这里就不再展开了。
总结
本文介绍了内存泄露相关的定位分析方法,虽然是面向 go 开发介绍的,但是也不局限于 go,特别是 ebpf-memleak 的应用,应用面应该会比较广。eBPF 对 Linux 内核版本是有严格要求的,使用过程中也需要注意,eBPF 的优势在于它为观测、测量提供了强大的基础支持,所以 bcc 才会有那么多的分析工具,是不可多得利器。
本文也算是自己对 eBPF 的一个初步尝试吧,希望掌握它对自己以后的工作有帮助。开发人员手上可以用的工具不少,但是真的好用、省心的也没有那么多,如果能 bcc 一行代码定位到位置,我想我也不会愿意 pmap、gdb gcore、gdb dump、strings+hexdump...来分析内存泄露位置,当然如果情况不允许,比如内核版本不支持 bcc,那还是灵活选择合适的方式。
除了掌握上述分析方法,解决已经引入的内存泄露问题,研发流程上也应该多关注上线前测试、CR 等基础的规范,尽量将一些问题前置,早发现早解决。