On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 5:30 PM, Dave Young <hidave.darkstar@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 5:17 PM, Catalin Marinas > <catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx> wrote: >> Dave Young <hidave.darkstar@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 7:21 PM, Catalin Marinas >>> <catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> On Thu, 2010-06-10 at 02:30 +0100, Dave Young wrote: >>>>> On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 9:16 AM, Rik van Riel <riel@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>> > On Wed, 9 Jun 2010 17:19:02 +0800 >>>>> > Dave Young <hidave.darkstar@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>> > >>>>> >> > Manually bisected mm patches, the memleak caused by following patch: >>>>> >> > >>>>> >> > mm-extend-ksm-refcounts-to-the-anon_vma-root.patch >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> So I guess the refcount break, either drop-without-get or over-drop >>>>> > >>>>> > I'm guessing I did not run the kernel with enough debug options enabled >>>>> > when I tested my patches... >>>>> > >>>>> > Dave & Catalin, thank you for tracking this down. >>>>> > >>>>> > Dave, does the below patch fix your issue? >>>>> >>>>> Yes, it fixed the issue. Thanks. >>>> >>>> Thanks for investigating this issue. >>>> >>>> BTW, without my kmemleak nobootmem patch (and CONFIG_NOBOOTMEM enabled), >>>> do you get other leaks (false positives). >>> >>> I didn't see difference before/after apply your patch, how to test >>> specific to bootmem? >> >> With Rik's patch applied and CONFIG_NOBOOTMEM enabled, do you get any >> false postives if my kmemleak patch isn't applied? > > No more, except a few acpi issue which always there > I got an oops when shutdown kvm guest with rik's patch applied, but without your bootmem patch, is it kmemleak problem? attached the screendump >> >> Thanks. >> >> -- >> Catalin >> > > > > -- > Regards > dave > -- Regards dave
Attachment:
screendump_with_catlan.png
Description: PNG image
