On Fri, 2009-10-02 at 13:30 -0500, James Bottomley wrote: > On Tue, 2009-09-22 at 23:13 +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote: > > On Tue, 2009-09-22 at 13:18 +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > > > Hello. > > > > > > I can see below message appears for 15 times in > > > /sys/kernel/debug/kmemleak after processing /init inside initramfs. > > > > > > unreferenced object 0xdeadb5c8 (size 32): > > > comm "insmod", pid 543, jiffies 4294674766 > > > backtrace: > > > [<c048a22c>] create_object+0x135/0x202 > > > [<c048a31e>] kmemleak_alloc+0x25/0x49 > > > [<c04865d9>] kmemleak_alloc_recursive+0x1c/0x22 > > > [<c0486d33>] __kmalloc+0x6c/0xb9 > > > [<c04f5675>] kvasprintf+0x2d/0x4a > > > [<c04ef5af>] kobject_set_name_vargs+0x21/0x50 > > > [<c054bbd7>] dev_set_name+0x1a/0x1c > > > [<e08dc1b7>] scsi_sysfs_device_initialize+0x8b/0xe4 [scsi_mod] > > > [<e08d9bbf>] scsi_alloc_sdev+0x134/0x18f [scsi_mod] > > > [<e08d9e7a>] scsi_probe_and_add_lun+0x107/0xa98 [scsi_mod] > > > [<e08da946>] __scsi_scan_target+0x70/0x4b1 [scsi_mod] > > > [<e08dadbe>] scsi_scan_channel+0x37/0x60 [scsi_mod] > > > [<e08dae9f>] scsi_scan_host_selected+0xb8/0xf1 [scsi_mod] > > > [<e08daf2c>] do_scsi_scan_host+0x54/0x5d [scsi_mod] > > > [<e08db2ef>] scsi_scan_host+0x14d/0x165 [scsi_mod] > > > [<e0959771>] mptspi_probe+0x2cd/0x2f8 [mptspi] > > > > I think this will fix it: > > > > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_scan.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_scan.c > > index 9ce5c34..284bcbe 100644 > > --- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_scan.c > > +++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_scan.c > > @@ -957,7 +957,7 @@ static inline void scsi_destroy_sdev(struct scsi_device *sdev) > > if (sdev->host->hostt->slave_destroy) > > sdev->host->hostt->slave_destroy(sdev); > > transport_destroy_device(&sdev->sdev_gendev); > > - put_device(&sdev->sdev_gendev); > > + put_device(&sdev->sdev_dev); > > } > > > > #ifdef CONFIG_SCSI_LOGGING > > > > > > sdev_dev has class == sdev_class. The release function for sdev_class is > > scsi_device_cls_release(), and _that_ does a put on the sdev_gendev. > > > > But someone who groks all that mess, er beauty ;D, should check that > > makes sense. > > The fix is correct, but it's depending on nastily deep magic inside the > scsi sysfs layers. Indeed, thanks for having a better look at it. I also used CONFIG_DEBUG_KOBJECT to verify that there was only one name being freed without the patch and two with it - which is a slightly more direct proof than the memleak output. cheers
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
