[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110927165807.GM14237@e102109-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 17:58:07 +0100
From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc: Huajun Li <huajun.li.lee@...il.com>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: Question about memory leak detector giving false positive
report for net/core/flow.c
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 06:55:18AM +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Yes, it was not a patch, but the general idea for Catalin ;)
>
> You hit the fact that same zone (embedded percpu space) is now in a
> mixed state.
>
> In current kernels, the embedded percpu zone is already known by
> kmemleak, but with a large granularity. kmemleak is not aware of
> individual allocations/freeing in this large zone.
>
> Once kmemleak and percpu allocator are cooperating, we might find more
> kmemleaks. Right now, kmemleak can find pointers in percpu chunks that
> are not anymore reachable (they were freed), and therefore doesnt warn
> of possible memory leaks.
Thanks for suggestions. I need to understand the percpu code a bit
better as it looks that kmemleak is told about some memory blocks twice.
--
Catalin
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists