Re: kmemleak panic

[Mike Rapoport]

On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 03:12:54PM +0100, Marc Gonzalez wrote:
> On 22/01/2019 15:02, Marc Gonzalez wrote:
> 
> > On 21/01/2019 18:42, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > 
> >> If I understood correctly, the trouble comes from no-map range allocated in 
> >> early_init_dt_alloc_reserved_memory_arch().
> >>
> >> There's indeed imbalance, because memblock_alloc() does kmemleak_alloc(), but
> >> memblock_remove() does not do kmemleak_free().
> >>
> >> I think the best way is to replace __memblock_alloc_base() with
> >> memblock_find_in_range(), e.g something like:
> >>
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/of/of_reserved_mem.c b/drivers/of/of_reserved_mem.c
> >> index 1977ee0adcb1..6807a1cffe55 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/of/of_reserved_mem.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/of/of_reserved_mem.c
> >> @@ -37,21 +37,16 @@ int __init __weak early_init_dt_alloc_reserved_memory_arch(phys_addr_t size,
> >>  	 */
> >>  	end = !end ? MEMBLOCK_ALLOC_ANYWHERE : end;
> >>  	align = !align ? SMP_CACHE_BYTES : align;
> >> -	base = __memblock_alloc_base(size, align, end);
> >> +	base = memblock_find_in_range(size, align, start, end);
> >>  	if (!base)
> >>  		return -ENOMEM;
> >>  
> >> -	/*
> >> -	 * Check if the allocated region fits in to start..end window
> >> -	 */
> >> -	if (base < start) {
> >> -		memblock_free(base, size);
> >> -		return -ENOMEM;
> >> -	}
> >> -
> >>  	*res_base = base;
> >>  	if (nomap)
> >>  		return memblock_remove(base, size);
> >> +	else
> >> +		return memblock_reserve(base, size);
> >> +
> >>  	return 0;
> >>  }
> >>  
> > 
> > Your patch solves the issue. \o/

Great :)
 
> [ Add nvidia devs, but drop schowdary@xxxxxxxxxx ]
> 

Resending it as a formal patch now, I took a liberty to add your Tested-by.