Re: [PATCH 03/15] kmemleak: Add the slab memory allocation/freeinghooks

[Christoph Lameter]

On Thu, 18 Dec 2008, Pekka Enberg wrote:

> For kmemleak, that's a problem. Unless we explicitly annotate the
> caches, it will scan them and think that there's a pointer to a leaked
> object (i.e. false negative). Catalin already took care of the per-CPU
> caches but AFAICT we still need to take care of the per-node caches
> and the shared caches.

Why doesnt kmemleak simply use the counter as a boundary and only access
those pointers that are valid?

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