[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20111004090446.GA10071@e102109-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2011 10:04:46 +0100
From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
To: Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Huajun Li <huajun.li.lee@...il.com>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] kmemleak: Handle percpu memory allocation
On Tue, Oct 04, 2011 at 08:59:15AM +0100, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 03, 2011 at 04:21:26PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > The updated patch below adds specific kmemleak API for percpu pointers
> > so that it only logs one call per allocation rather than the number of
> > possible cpus (could be split in two, though the patch is relatively
> > simple):
>
> The percpu part looks fine to me but I don't know how kmemleak works
> to judge whether the kmemleak part is okay or not. This just avoids
> false positives from slab and would still require bumping up the early
> log memory as # of cpus increases, right?
No, there is only one kmemleak call for each __percpu pointer (to the
specific kmemleak_*_percpu function). The kmemleak expands the percpu
pointer into corresponding blocks for each cpu but the early log only
stores a single call.
> For percpu part,
>
> Acked-by: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Thanks.
> How do you want to route this? If kmemleak patches get routed through
> -mm, please feel free to send it to Andrew with Acked-by's added.
I'll push them to -next for now and (depending on how late the merge
window opens) I can send a pull request to Linus.
--
Catalin
--
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