> On Sep 13, 2024, at 11:10 PM, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 9/6/24 10:10, Jinjie Ruan wrote: >> >> >> On 2024/9/5 21:59, Hyeonggon Yoo wrote: >>> On Thu, Sep 5, 2024 at 12:41 PM Jinjie Ruan <ruanjinjie@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 2022/11/12 19:46, Liu Shixin wrote: >>>>> There is a memory leak of kobj->name in sysfs_slab_add(): >>>>> >>>>> unreferenced object 0xffff88817e446440 (size 32): >>>>> comm "insmod", pid 4085, jiffies 4296564501 (age 126.272s) >>>>> hex dump (first 32 bytes): >>>>> 75 62 69 66 73 5f 69 6e 6f 64 65 5f 73 6c 61 62 ubifs_inode_slab >>>>> 00 65 44 7e 81 88 ff ff 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 .eD~............ >>>>> backtrace: >>>>> [<000000005b30fbbd>] __kmalloc_node_track_caller+0x4e/0x150 >>>>> [<000000002f70da0c>] kstrdup_const+0x4b/0x80 >>>>> [<00000000c6712c61>] kobject_set_name_vargs+0x2f/0xb0 >>>>> [<00000000b151218e>] kobject_init_and_add+0xb0/0x120 >>>>> [<00000000e56a4cf5>] sysfs_slab_add+0x17d/0x220 >>>>> [<000000009326fd57>] __kmem_cache_create+0x406/0x590 >>>>> [<00000000dde33cff>] kmem_cache_create_usercopy+0x1fc/0x300 >>>>> [<00000000fe90cedb>] kmem_cache_create+0x12/0x20 >>>>> [<000000007a6531c8>] 0xffffffffa02d802d >>>>> [<000000000e3b13c7>] do_one_initcall+0x87/0x2a0 >>>>> [<00000000995ecdcf>] do_init_module+0xdf/0x320 >>>>> [<000000008821941f>] load_module+0x2f98/0x3330 >>>>> [<00000000ef51efa4>] __do_sys_finit_module+0x113/0x1b0 >>>>> [<000000009339fbce>] do_syscall_64+0x35/0x80 >>>>> [<000000006b7f2033>] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x46/0xb0 >>>> >>>> >>>> Hi，every one, >>> >>> Hi. >>> >>>> I found the same problem and it solve this problem with the patch, is >>>> there any plan to update the patch and solve it. > > Hmm looks like back in 2022, Hyeonggon had some feedback to the series which > was not answered and then it got forgotten. Feel free to take over and send > an updated version. I was thinking of what the fix would be with my feedback, and I still think passing different kobj_type (with a dummy release function) for early kmem_caches will be a more appropriate approach. However, there is one concern: people that wrote kobject.rst might not like it :( in Documentation/core-api/kobject.rst: > One important point cannot be overstated: every kobject must have a release() method, > and the kobject must persist (in a consistent state) until that method is called. If these constraints are not met, > the code is flawed. Note that the kernel will warn you if you forget to provide a release() method. > Do not try to get rid of this warning by providing an "empty" release function. But obviously we don't want to release caches just because the kernel failed to add it to sysfs. >>> What kernel version do you use, >> >> 6.11.0-rc6 >> >>> and when do you encounter it or how do you reproduce it? >> >> Hi, Hyeonggon, >> >> Thank you, I encounter it when doing inject fault test while modprobe >> amdgpu.ko. > > So I wonder where's the problem that results in kobject_init_and_add() > failing. If it's genuinely duplicate name as commit 80da026a8e5d suggests, > 6.12-rc1 will have a warning to prevent that. Delayed destruction of > SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU caches should also no longer happen with 6.12-rc1. So > worth retrying with that and if it's still failing, we should look at the > root cause perhaps. I thought it was because the memory allocation for a name string failed due to fault injection? > >>> >>> -- >>> Hyeonggon
