Re: blk-mq vs kmemleak

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, Aug 03, 2015 at 02:33:27PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 03, 2015 at 11:43:09AM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > The simplest would be to add a kmemleak_not_leak() annotation in
> > scsi_init_request(), though you would hide real leaks (if any).
> > 
> > A better way could be to inform kmemleak of these pages, something like
> > below (compile-tested only):
> 
> Both versions sound reasonable to me, but I'd prefer the second one if
> it works.

I don't currently have a system where scsi_init_request() is used. But I
hacked loop_init_request (and added a loop_exit_request) to allocate a
dummy structure. Without this patch, I indeed get a few hundred kmemleak
reports which disappear once I apply it.

-- 
Catalin

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [SCSI Target Devel]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Kernel Newbies]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Linux IIO]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]
  Powered by Linux