On Tue, Apr 11, 2023 at 10:07:53AM -0700, Luis Chamberlain wrote: > On Tue, Apr 11, 2023 at 04:10:24PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 03, 2023 at 01:43:58PM -0700, Luis Chamberlain wrote: > > > On Fri, Mar 31, 2023 at 05:27:04PM -0700, Song Liu wrote: > > > > On Fri, Mar 31, 2023 at 12:00 AM Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 04:45:43PM -0600, jim.cromie@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > > > > kmemleak is reporting 19 leaks during boot > > > > > > > > > > > > because the hexdumps appeared to have module-names, > > > > > > and Ive been hacking nearby, and see the same names > > > > > > every time I boot my test-vm, I needed a clearer picture > > > > > > Jason corroborated and bisected. > > > > > > > > > > > > the 19 leaks split into 2 groups, > > > > > > 9 with names of builtin modules in the hexdump, > > > > > > all with the same backtrace > > > > > > 9 without module-names (with a shared backtrace) > > > > > > +1 wo name-ish and a separate backtrace > > > > > > > > > > Song, please take a look. > > > > > > > > I will look into this next week. > > > > > > I'm thinking this may be it, at least this gets us to what we used to do > > > as per original Catalinas' 4f2294b6dc88d ("kmemleak: Add modules > > > support") and right before Song's patch. > > > > > > diff --git a/kernel/module/main.c b/kernel/module/main.c > > > index 6b6da80f363f..3b9c71fa6096 100644 > > > --- a/kernel/module/main.c > > > +++ b/kernel/module/main.c > > > @@ -2240,7 +2240,10 @@ static int move_module(struct module *mod, struct load_info *info) > > > * which is inside the block. Just mark it as not being a > > > * leak. > > > */ > > > - kmemleak_ignore(ptr); > > > + if (type == MOD_INIT_TEXT) > > > + kmemleak_ignore(ptr); > > > + else > > > + kmemleak_not_leak(ptr); > > > if (!ptr) { > > > t = type; > > > goto out_enomem; > > > > > > We used to use the grey area for the TEXT but the original commit > > > doesn't explain too well why we grey out init but not the others. Ie > > > why kmemleak_ignore() on init and kmemleak_not_leak() on the others. > > > > It's safe to use the 'grey' colour in all cases. For text sections that > > don't need scanning, there's a slight chance of increasing the false > > negatives, > > It turns out that there are *tons* of false positives today, unless > these are real leaks. I should clarify: *if* we leave things as-is, we seem to get tons of false positives. Luis