[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-id: <1399540611.13268.45.camel@kjgkr>
Date: Thu, 08 May 2014 18:16:51 +0900
From: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk.kim@...sung.com>
To: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
"Linux Kernel, Mailing List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [BUG] kmemleak on __radix_tree_preload
2014-05-07 (수), 12:39 +0100, Catalin Marinas:
> On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 03:58:08AM +0100, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> > And then when I tested again with Catalin's patch, it still throws the
> > following warning.
> > Is it false alarm?
>
> BTW, you can try this kmemleak branch:
Ok. Will test.
>
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/cmarinas/linux-aarch64.git kmemleak
>
> > unreferenced object 0xffff880004226da0 (size 576):
> > comm "fsstress", pid 14590, jiffies 4295191259 (age 706.308s)
> > hex dump (first 32 bytes):
> > 01 00 00 00 81 ff ff ff 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................
> > 50 89 34 81 ff ff ff ff b8 6d 22 04 00 88 ff ff P.4......m".....
> > backtrace:
> > [<ffffffff816c02e8>] kmemleak_update_trace+0x58/0x80
> > [<ffffffff81349517>] radix_tree_node_alloc+0x77/0xa0
> > [<ffffffff81349718>] __radix_tree_create+0x1d8/0x230
> > [<ffffffff8113286c>] __add_to_page_cache_locked+0x9c/0x1b0
> > [<ffffffff811329a8>] add_to_page_cache_lru+0x28/0x80
> > [<ffffffff81132f58>] grab_cache_page_write_begin+0x98/0xf0
> > [<ffffffffa02e4bf4>] f2fs_write_begin+0xb4/0x3c0 [f2fs]
> > [<ffffffff81131b77>] generic_perform_write+0xc7/0x1c0
> > [<ffffffff81133b7d>] __generic_file_aio_write+0x1cd/0x3f0
> > [<ffffffff81133dfe>] generic_file_aio_write+0x5e/0xe0
> > [<ffffffff81195c5a>] do_sync_write+0x5a/0x90
> > [<ffffffff811968d2>] vfs_write+0xc2/0x1d0
> > [<ffffffff81196daf>] SyS_write+0x4f/0xb0
> > [<ffffffff816dead2>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
> > [<ffffffffffffffff>] 0xffffffffffffffff
>
> OK, it shows that the allocation happens via add_to_page_cache_locked()
> and I guess it's page_cache_tree_insert() which calls
> __radix_tree_create() (the latter reusing the preloaded node). I'm not
> familiar enough to this code (radix-tree.c and filemap.c) to tell where
> the node should have been freed, who keeps track of it.
>
> At a quick look at the hex dump (assuming that the above leak is struct
> radix_tree_node):
>
> .path = 1
> .count = -0x7f (or 0xffffff81 as unsigned int)
> union {
> {
> .parent = NULL
> .private_data = 0xffffffff81348950
> }
> {
> .rcu_head.next = NULL
> .rcu_head.func = 0xffffffff81348950
> }
> }
>
> The count is a bit suspicious.
>
> From the union, it looks most likely like rcu_head information. Is
> radix_tree_node_rcu_free() function at the above rcu_head.func?
>
> Could you please send us your .config file?
Sure, I attached the config.
>
> Also, if you run echo scan > /sys/kernel/debug/kmemleak a few times, do
> any of the above leaks disappear (in case the above are some transient
> rcu freeing reports; normally this shouldn't happen as the objects are
> still referred but I'll look at the relevant code once I have your
> .config).
Once I run the echo, the leaks are still remained.
Thanks,
>
> Thanks.
>
--
Jaegeuk Kim
Samsung
View attachment "config" of type "text/x-mpsub" (145202 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists