linux-kernel - Re: Kmemleak feature

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20120510172116.GB20860@arm.com>
Date:	Thu, 10 May 2012 18:21:16 +0100
From:	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
To:	Anbu Manikandan <canbumanikandan@...il.com>
Cc:	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Kmemleak feature

On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 05:42:35PM +0100, Anbu Manikandan wrote:
> As suggested by you, I have executed Kmemleak on 2.6.35-kernel and 3.0-RT
> kernel.
> I have noticed that Kmemleak behavior is little different between 2.6.35 and
> 3.0-RT kernel for vmalloc allocation memory leak. There is no entry for vmalloc
> allocation memory leak in 3.0-RT kernel.
...
> I tried modifying min_count value for vmalloc allocation from "3" to "4" as
> below in 3.0-RT kernel:

I can reproduce the missing vmalloc report on a non-rt 3.4-rc3 kernel as
well, so something must have changed in the vmalloc code in the past
months. A suspecting commit is f5252e00 but I need to investigate
whether a third reference to the vmalloc'ed pointer is stored in the
generic code somewhere before we decide to bump the min_count to 4.

-- 
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/