Memory leak detector gives following memory leak report, it seems the report is triggered by net/core/flow.c, but actually, it should be a false positive report. So, is there any idea from kmemleak side to fix/disable this false positive report like this? Yes, kmemleak_not_leak(...) could disable it, but is it suitable for this case ? BTW, I wrote a simple test code to emulate net/core/flow.c behavior at this stage which triggers the report, and it could also make kmemleak give similar report, please check below test code: kernel version: #uname -a Linux 3.1.0-rc7 #22 SMP Tue Sep 26 05:43:01 CST 2011 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux memory leak report: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- unreferenced object 0xffff880073a70000 (size 8192): comm "swapper", pid 1, jiffies 4294937832 (age 445.740s) hex dump (first 32 bytes): 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................ 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................ backtrace: [<ffffffff8124db64>] create_object+0x144/0x360 [<ffffffff8191192e>] kmemleak_alloc+0x7e/0x110 [<ffffffff81235b26>] __kmalloc_node+0x156/0x3a0 [<ffffffff81935512>] flow_cache_cpu_prepare.clone.1+0x58/0xc0 [<ffffffff8214c361>] flow_cache_init_global+0xb6/0x1af [<ffffffff8100225d>] do_one_initcall+0x4d/0x260 [<ffffffff820ec2e9>] kernel_init+0x161/0x23a [<ffffffff8194ab04>] kernel_thread_helper+0x4/0x10 [<ffffffffffffffff>] 0xffffffffffffffff unreferenced object 0xffff880073a74290 (size 8192): comm "swapper", pid 1, jiffies 4294937832 (age 445.740s) hex dump (first 32 bytes): 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................ 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................ backtrace: [<ffffffff8124db64>] create_object+0x144/0x360 [<ffffffff8191192e>] kmemleak_alloc+0x7e/0x110 [<ffffffff81235b26>] __kmalloc_node+0x156/0x3a0 [<ffffffff81935512>] flow_cache_cpu_prepare.clone.1+0x58/0xc0 [<ffffffff8214c361>] flow_cache_init_global+0xb6/0x1af [<ffffffff8100225d>] do_one_initcall+0x4d/0x260 [<ffffffff820ec2e9>] kernel_init+0x161/0x23a [<ffffffff8194ab04>] kernel_thread_helper+0x4/0x10 [<ffffffffffffffff>] 0xffffffffffffffff Simple test code to reproduce a similar report: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODULE_LICENSE("GPL"); struct test { int *pt; }; static struct test __percpu *percpu; static int __init test_init(void) { int i; percpu = alloc_percpu(struct test); if (!percpu) return -ENOMEM; for_each_online_cpu(i) { struct test *p = per_cpu_ptr(percpu, i); p->pt = kmalloc(sizeof(int), GFP_KERNEL); } return 0; } static void __exit test_exit(void) { int i; for_each_possible_cpu(i) { struct test *p = per_cpu_ptr(percpu, i); if (p->pt) kfree(p->pt); } if (percpu) free_percpu(percpu); } module_init(test_init); module_exit(test_exit); -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx"> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>