[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHp75VePzuYwHxA4S8UiUKG1uSqpvnJhfajjJkQi1qS-BhHSdg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2021 16:15:11 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To: Faiyaz Mohammed <faiyazm@...eaurora.org>
Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, glittao@...il.com,
vinmenon@...eaurora.org, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] mm: slub: fix the leak of alloc/free traces debugfs interface
On Fri, Jun 18, 2021 at 3:38 PM Faiyaz Mohammed <faiyazm@...eaurora.org> wrote:
>
> fix the leak of alloc/free traces debugfs interface, reported
Fix
> by kmemleak like below,
>
> unreferenced object 0xffff00091ae1b540 (size 64):
> comm "lsbug", pid 1607, jiffies 4294958291 (age 1476.340s)
> hex dump (first 32 bytes):
> 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 6b 6b 6b 6b 6b 6b 6b 6b ........kkkkkkkk
> 6b 6b 6b 6b 6b 6b 6b 6b 6b 6b 6b 6b 6b 6b 6b 6b kkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk
> backtrace:
> [<ffff8000106b06b8>] slab_post_alloc_hook+0xa0/0x418
> [<ffff8000106b5c7c>] kmem_cache_alloc_trace+0x1e4/0x378
> [<ffff8000106b5e40>] slab_debugfs_start+0x30/0x50
> slab_debugfs_start at mm/slub.c:5831
> [<ffff8000107b3dbc>] seq_read_iter+0x214/0xd50
> [<ffff8000107b4b84>] seq_read+0x28c/0x418
> [<ffff8000109560b4>] full_proxy_read+0xdc/0x148
> [<ffff800010738f24>] vfs_read+0x104/0x340
> [<ffff800010739ee0>] ksys_read+0xf8/0x1e0
> [<ffff80001073a03c>] __arm64_sys_read+0x74/0xa8
> [<ffff8000100358d4>] invoke_syscall.constprop.0+0xdc/0x1d8
> [<ffff800010035ab4>] do_el0_svc+0xe4/0x298
> [<ffff800011138528>] el0_svc+0x20/0x30
> [<ffff800011138b08>] el0t_64_sync_handler+0xb0/0xb8
> [<ffff80001001259c>] el0t_64_sync+0x178/0x17c
Can you shrink this a bit?
> Fixes: 84a2bdb1b458fc968d6d9e07dab388dc679bd747 ("mm: slub: move sysfs slab alloc/free interfaces to debugfs")
We use 12, which is shorter.
> Link: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/commit/mm/slub.c?h=next-20210617&id=84a2bdb1b458fc968d6d9e07dab388dc679bd747
>
Must be no blank lines in the tag block.
> Signed-off-by: Faiyaz Mohammed <faiyazm@...eaurora.org>
...
> static void *slab_debugfs_next(struct seq_file *seq, void *v, loff_t *ppos)
> {
> - loff_t *spos = v;
> struct loc_track *t = seq->private;
>
> + v = ppos;
> if (*ppos < t->count) {
> - *ppos = ++*spos;
> - return spos;
> + ++*ppos;
> + return v;
> }
> - *ppos = ++*spos;
> + ++*ppos;
> return NULL;
Can it be
v = ppos;
++*ppos;
if (*ppos <= t->count)
return v;
return NULL;
? (basically the question is, is the comparison equivalent in this case or not)
> }
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists