[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALYGNiOHu5gif7Kqgt_LCMBBOHq-LxffSFJGn6Joi6dccDfptQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2019 07:26:09 +0300
From: Konstantin Khlebnikov <koct9i@...il.com>
To: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
Cc: Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@...dex-team.ru>,
Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/core/neighbour: tell kmemleak about hash tables
On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 11:45 PM Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 1:30 AM Konstantin Khlebnikov
> <khlebnikov@...dex-team.ru> wrote:
> > @@ -443,12 +444,14 @@ static struct neigh_hash_table *neigh_hash_alloc(unsigned int shift)
> > ret = kmalloc(sizeof(*ret), GFP_ATOMIC);
> > if (!ret)
> > return NULL;
> > - if (size <= PAGE_SIZE)
> > + if (size <= PAGE_SIZE) {
> > buckets = kzalloc(size, GFP_ATOMIC);
> > - else
> > + } else {
> > buckets = (struct neighbour __rcu **)
> > __get_free_pages(GFP_ATOMIC | __GFP_ZERO,
> > get_order(size));
> > + kmemleak_alloc(buckets, size, 0, GFP_ATOMIC);
>
> Why min_count is 0 rather than 1 here?
The api isn't clear and I've misread description.
So it should be 1 for reporting leak of hash table itself.
But 0 doesn't add any new issues.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists