Hi Joonsoo, On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 4:27 PM, JoonSoo Kim <js1304@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > 2012/9/6 Ezequiel Garcia <elezegarcia@xxxxxxxxx>: >> Hi David, >> >> On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 9:59 PM, David Rientjes <rientjes@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On Wed, 5 Sep 2012, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: >>> >>>> I'm not sure this is the best solution, >>>> but creating another function to reuse between strndup_user >>>> and memdup_user seemed like an overkill. >>>> >>> >>> It's not, so you'd need to do two things to fix this: >>> >>> - provide a reason why strndup_user() is special compared to other >>> common library functions that also allocate memory, and >>> >> >> Sorry, I don't understand what you mean. >> strndup_user is *not* special than any other function, simply if you use >> memdup_user for the allocation you will get traces with strndup_user >> as the caller, >> and that's not desirable. > > I'm not sure that this changed should be needed. Why do you think this? > But, if you want to fix this properly, why don't change __krealloc() ? > It is called by krealloc(), and may return krealloc()'s address. That's already fixed and applied on Pekka's tree, it's this one: mm: Use __do_krealloc to do the krealloc job I think this kind of issues are important, yet overlooked, for kmem tracing to become useful. There's a reason we have kmalloc_track_caller, and it would be nice to have them all trace properly. Regards, Ezequiel. -- 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/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>