Re: [PATCH] block: kmemleak: Track the page allocations for struct request

[Jens Axboe]

On 11/25/2015 04:04 AM, William Dauchy wrote:
> Hi Jens,
>
> On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 7:21 PM, Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On 09/14/2015 11:16 AM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > > The pages allocated for struct request contain pointers to other slab
> > > allocations (via ops->init_request). Since kmemleak does not track/scan
> > > page allocations, the slab objects will be reported as leaks (false
> > > positives). This patch adds kmemleak callbacks to allow tracking of such
> > > pages.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx>
> > > Reported-by: Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Tested-by: Bart Van Assche<bart.vanassche@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > >
> > > Jens,
> > >
> > > I just realised that no-one has picked this patch up for -rc1. It was
> > > discussed here previously:
> > >
> > >
> > > http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20150803104309.GB4033@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >
> > > Since it touches the block layer, are you fine with merging it?
> >
> >
> > Yeah looks simple enough for me, not sure why it got missed. I'll add it for
> > 4.4-rc1, thanks.
>
> I saw the related kmemleaks reports on my v4.1.x kernel. Since it's
> actually fixing these wrong reports, do you think it could be a good
> candidate for -stable tree?

I'd say it's borderline. It's fixing a tracking bug. Unless others feel 
strongly otherwise, I don't think it's stable material.

--
Jens Axboe

--
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/