[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-id: <542BE977.3040807@samsung.com>
Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2014 15:45:59 +0400
From: Andrey Ryabinin <a.ryabinin@...sung.com>
To: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>
Cc: Andrey Ryabinin <ryabinin.a.a@...il.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Konstantin Serebryany <kcc@...gle.com>,
Dmitry Chernenkov <dmitryc@...gle.com>,
Andrey Konovalov <adech.fo@...il.com>,
Yuri Gribov <tetra2005@...il.com>,
Konstantin Khlebnikov <koct9i@...il.com>,
Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@...cle.com>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...il.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 11/13] kmemleak: disable kasan instrumentation for
kmemleak
On 10/01/2014 02:39 PM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 03:10:01PM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 9:36 PM, Andrey Ryabinin <ryabinin.a.a@...il.com> wrote:
>>> 2014-09-26 21:10 GMT+04:00 Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>:
>>>> Looks good to me.
>>>>
>>>> We can disable kasan instrumentation of this file as well.
>>>
>>> Yes, but why? I don't think we need that.
>>
>> Just gut feeling. Such tools usually don't play well together. For
>> example, due to asan quarantine lots of leaks will be missed (if we
>> pretend that tools work together, end users will use them together and
>> miss bugs). I won't be surprised if leak detector touches freed
>> objects under some circumstances as well.
>> We can do this if/when discover actual compatibility issues, of course.
>
> I think it's worth testing them together first.
>
I did test them together. With this patch applied both tools works without problems.
> One issue, as mentioned in the patch log, is that the size information
> that kmemleak gets is the one from the kmem_cache object rather than the
> original allocation size, so this would be rounded up.
>
> Kmemleak should not touch freed objects (if an object is freed during a
> scan, it is protected by some lock until the scan completes). There is a
> bug however which I haven't got to fixing it yet, if kmemleak fails for
> some reason (cannot allocate memory) and disables itself, it may access
> some freed object (though usually hard to trigger).
>
--
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