[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190121143704.GE29504@arrakis.emea.arm.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2019 14:37:04 +0000
From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
To: Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>
Cc: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
Marc Gonzalez <marc.w.gonzalez@...e.fr>,
Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de>,
Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@...il.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Sri Krishna chowdary <schowdary@...dia.com>,
Qian Cai <cai@....pw>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: kmemleak panic
On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 07:35:11AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 6:19 AM Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com> wrote:
> >
> > On 21/01/2019 11:57, Marc Gonzalez wrote:
> > [...]
> > > # echo dump=0xffffffc021e00000 > /sys/kernel/debug/kmemleak
> > > kmemleak: Object 0xffffffc021e00000 (size 2097152):
> > > kmemleak: comm "swapper/0", pid 0, jiffies 4294892296
> > > kmemleak: min_count = 0
> > > kmemleak: count = 0
> > > kmemleak: flags = 0x1
> > > kmemleak: checksum = 0
> > > kmemleak: backtrace:
> > > kmemleak_alloc_phys+0x48/0x60
> > > memblock_alloc_range_nid+0x8c/0xa4
> > > memblock_alloc_base_nid+0x4c/0x60
> > > __memblock_alloc_base+0x3c/0x4c
> > > early_init_dt_alloc_reserved_memory_arch+0x54/0xa4
> > > fdt_init_reserved_mem+0x308/0x3ec
> > > early_init_fdt_scan_reserved_mem+0x88/0xb0
> > > arm64_memblock_init+0x1dc/0x254
> > > setup_arch+0x1c8/0x4ec
> > > start_kernel+0x84/0x44c
> > > 0xffffffffffffffff
> >
> > OK, so via the __va(phys) call in kmemleak_alloc_phys(), you end up with
> > the linear map address of a no-map reservation, which unsurprisingly
> > turns out not to be mapped. Is there a way to tell kmemleak that it
> > can't scan within a particular object?
>
> There was this patch posted[1]. I never got a reply, so it hasn't been applied.
>
> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/995367/
Thanks Rob, I wasn't aware of this patch (or I just missed it at the
time).
I wonder whether kmemleak should simply remove ranges passed to
memblock_remove(), or at least mark them as no-scan.
--
Catalin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists