[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7131f2b9-d4c3-b858-2d17-c56003789df2@huawei.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2019 11:02:32 +0000
From: John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>
To: Robert Richter <rrichter@...vell.com>
CC: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
"tony.luck@...el.com" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
"linux-edac@...r.kernel.org" <linux-edac@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
wanghuiqiang <wanghuiqiang@...wei.com>,
Xiaofei Tan <tanxiaofei@...wei.com>,
Linuxarm <linuxarm@...wei.com>,
"Huangming (Mark)" <huangming23@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: linuxnext-20191127 edac warns (was Re: edac KASAN warning in
experimental arm64 allmodconfig boot)
Hi Robert,
> thank you for testing.
I'm just stumbling across these, TBH.
>
> On 27.11.19 17:07:33, John Garry wrote:
>
>> [snip]
>>
>> I have test enabled:
>> +CONFIG_DEBUG_TEST_DRIVER_REMOVE=y
>> +CONFIG_KASAN=y
>> +CONFIG_DEBUG_KMEMLEAK=y
>
> Is this a regression (did it work before?), or a new test that you
> newly run?
linuxnext-20191119 does not look to have the issue - that's when I
cherry-pick your refcount fix - but has lots of memory leaks:
root@(none)$
root@(none)$ echo scan > /sys/kernel/debug/kmemleak
root@(none)$ [ 121.639978] kmemleak: 128 new suspected memory leaks
(see /sys/kernel/debug/kmemleak)
root@(none)$ cat /sys/kernel/debug/kmemleak
unreferenced object 0xffff00236c24ba00 (size 256):
comm "swapper/0", pid 1, jiffies 4294897826 (age 107.824s)
hex dump (first 32 bytes):
00 40 2d 3c 23 00 ff ff 00 48 2d 3c 23 00 ff ff .@-<#....H-<#...
00 50 2d 3c 23 00 ff ff 00 58 2d 3c 23 00 ff ff .P-<#....X-<#...
backtrace:
[<0000000009aed8e3>] __kmalloc+0x1e0/0x2c0
[<00000000bf599427>] edac_mc_alloc+0x31c/0x888
[<00000000c070e314>] ghes_edac_register+0x15c/0x390
[<00000000e4aad1c2>] ghes_probe+0x28c/0x5f0
[<0000000079c357cb>] platform_drv_probe+0x70/0xd8
[<00000000d4ab9188>] really_probe+0x118/0x548
[<00000000763d50f1>] driver_probe_device+0x7c/0x148
[<0000000058e623c3>] device_driver_attach+0x94/0xa0
[<00000000d7cb679d>] __driver_attach+0xa4/0x110
[<000000007d0942a0>] bus_for_each_dev+0xe8/0x158
[<000000004cf734d1>] driver_attach+0x30/0x40
[<000000009aa3536e>] bus_add_driver+0x234/0x2f0
[<00000000d163cfe0>] driver_register+0xbc/0x1d0
[<000000007e4f0ac1>] __platform_driver_register+0x7c/0x88
[<00000000a63c8dd0>] ghes_init+0xbc/0x14c
[<00000000356c8a7f>] do_one_initcall+0xb4/0x254
unreferenced object 0xffff00233c2d4000 (size 1024):
comm "swapper/0", pid 1, jiffies 4294897826 (age 107.824s)
hex dump (first 32 bytes):
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................
backtrace:
[<000000004945469f>] kmem_cache_alloc+0x188/0x260
[<0000000032ea779d>] edac_mc_alloc+0x38c/0x888
Unfortunately v5.4 has similar memory leaks.
Thanks,
John
Powered by blists - more mailing lists