On Wed, 2 Oct 2013, Bird, Tim wrote: > The problem child is actually the unconditional call to kmemleak_alloc() > in kmalloc_large_node() (in slub.c). The problem comes because that call > is unconditional on CONFIG_SLUB_DEBUG but the kmemleak > calls in the hook routines are conditional on CONFIG_SLUB_DEBUG. > So if you have CONFIG_SLUB_DEBUG=n but CONFIG_DEBUG_KMEMLEAK=y, > you get the false reports. Right. You need to put the #ifdef CONFIG_SLUB_DEBUG around the hooks that need it in the function itself instead of disabling the whole function if CONFIG_SLUB_DEUBG is not set. > Now, there are kmemleak calls in kmalloc_large_node() and kfree() that don't > follow the "hook" pattern. Should these be moved to 'hook' routines, to keep > all the checks in the hooks? That would be great. > Personally, I like the idea of keeping bookeeping/tracing/debug stuff in hook > routines. I also like de-coupling CONFIG_SLUB_DEBUG and CONFIG_DEBUG_KMEMLEAK, > but maybe others have a different opinon. Unless someone speaks up, we'll > move the the currently in-function kmemleak calls into hooks, and all of the > kmemleak stuff out from under CONFIG_SLUB_DEBUG. > We'll have to see if the ifdefs get a little messy. Decouple of you want. CONFIG_SLUB_DEBUG may duplicate what you already do. -- 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>