----- On Jun 24, 2019, at 11:52 AM, Joel Fernandes, Google joel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 10:01:04AM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: >> ----- On Jun 24, 2019, at 5:18 AM, Peter Zijlstra peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: >> >> > While auditing all module notifiers I noticed a whole bunch of fail >> > wrt the return value. Notifiers have a 'special' return semantics. >> > >> > Cc: Robert Richter <rric@xxxxxxxxxx> >> > Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx> >> > Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx> >> > Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@xxxxxxxxxx> >> > Cc: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> > Cc: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@xxxxxx> >> > Cc: Song Liu <songliubraving@xxxxxx> >> > Cc: Yonghong Song <yhs@xxxxxx> >> > Cc: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >> > Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> > Cc: "Joel Fernandes (Google)" <joel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> > Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@xxxxxxxxxx> >> > Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> > Cc: oprofile-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx >> > Cc: linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> > Cc: netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> > Cc: bpf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> > Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> Thanks Peter for looking into this, especially considering your >> endless love for kernel modules! ;) >> >> It's not directly related to your changes, but I notice that >> kernel/trace/trace_printk.c:hold_module_trace_bprintk_format() >> appears to leak memory. Am I missing something ? > > Could you elaborate? Do you mean there is no MODULE_STATE_GOING notifier > check? If that's what you mean then I agree, there should be some place > where the format structures are freed when the module is unloaded no? Yes, the lack of GOING notifier is worrying considering that GOING performs memory allocation. Thanks, Mathieu -- Mathieu Desnoyers EfficiOS Inc. http://www.efficios.com
