On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 03:18:10PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 03:08:47PM +0100, Christoph Lameter wrote: > > On Wed, 28 Sep 2011, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > > > > I tried this but it's tricky. The problem is that the percpu pointer > > > returned by alloc_percpu() does not directly point to the per-cpu chunks > > > and kmemleak would report most percpu allocations as leaks. So far the > > > workaround is to simply mark the alloc_percpu() objects as never leaking > > > and at least we avoid false positives in other areas. See the patch > > > below (note that you have to increase the CONFIG_KMEMLEAK_EARLY_LOG_SIZE > > > as there are many alloc_percpu() calls before kmemleak is fully > > > initialised): > > > > Seems that kernel.org is out and so tejon wont be seeing these. > > That's ok, I don't aim this at the upcoming merging window. I don't have > an alternative email address for him. That's htejun@xxxxxxxxx but as long as lkml is cc'd I can read the emails. Lack of replies is more due to the month long vacation which just ended. ;) Thank you. -- tejun -- 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>