[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <19f34abd0804020915k210277bbmb6b9aa28f282bb42@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 18:15:52 +0200
From: "Vegard Nossum" <vegard.nossum@...il.com>
To: paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc: "Pekka Enberg" <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>,
"Jens Axboe" <jens.axboe@...cle.com>,
"Peter Zijlstra" <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: kmemcheck caught read from freed memory (cfq_free_io_context)
On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 6:08 PM, Paul E. McKenney
<paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 02, 2008 at 02:01:13PM +0300, Pekka Enberg wrote:
> > No, kmemcheck is work in progress and does not know about
> > SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU yet. The reason I asked Vegard to post the warning
> > was because Peter, Vegard, and myself identified this particular
> > warning as a real problem. But yeah, kmemcheck can cause false
> > positives for RCU for now.
>
> Would the following be an appropriate fix? It seems to me to be in
> the same spirit as the existing check for s->ctor.
In my opinion, no.
It would fix the false positives, but would in fact also hide cases
such as this one with cfq, e.g. the real cases of mis-use.
Peter Zijlstra suggested this:
> It would have to register an call_rcu callback itself in order to mark
> it freed - and handle the race with the object being handed out again.
I will try to look into this -- for now, I need to understand RCU
first (I've seen your LWN articles -- great work! :-))
Kind regards,
Vegard Nossum
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists