On Fri, Nov 10, 2023 at 05:19:38PM -0700, jim.cromie@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > On Fri, Apr 28, 2023 at 11:25 AM Catalin Marinas > <catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 25, 2023 at 04:24:43PM -0600, Jim Cromie wrote: > > > If format changes are not /sys/** ABI violating, heres 3 minor ones: > > > > > > 1st strips "age <increasing>" from output. This makes the output > > > idempotent; unchanging until a new leak is reported. > > > > > > 2nd adds the backtrace.checksum to the "backtrace:" line. This lets a > > > user see repeats without actually reading the whole backtrace. So now > > > the backtrace line looks like this: > > > > > > backtrace (ck 603070071): # also see below > > > > > > Q: should ck be spelled crc ? it feels more communicative. > > > > These all would make sense (and 'crc' sounds better) if they were done > > from the start. I know there are test scripts out there parsing the > > kmemleak sysfs file. I can't tell whether these changes would break > > them. > > > > Cc'ing Dmitry, I think syzbot was regularly checking kmemleak (not sure > > it still does). [...] > QED: there are no kmemleak parsers in public github repos that would > break with these changes Thanks for digging into this, I completely forgot about this series. Would you mind rebasing to the latest kernel and reposting? Thanks. -- Catalin
