From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753487AbYLRVme (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Dec 2008 16:42:34 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752506AbYLRVmX (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Dec 2008 16:42:23 -0500 Received: from nlpi025.sbcis.sbc.com ([207.115.36.54]:38951 "EHLO nlpi025.prodigy.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752218AbYLRVmW (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Dec 2008 16:42:22 -0500 Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2008 15:41:55 -0600 (CST) From: Christoph Lameter X-X-Sender: cl@quilx.com To: Pekka Enberg cc: Catalin Marinas , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/15] kmemleak: Add the slab memory allocation/freeing hooks In-Reply-To: <84144f020812181206o3d85fbd3t6b30346d7cf76d9d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: References: <20081210182652.30323.4594.stgit@pc1117.cambridge.arm.com> <20081210182710.30323.57396.stgit@pc1117.cambridge.arm.com> <494184AA.8090509@cs.helsinki.fi> <1229092065.15045.35.camel@pc1117.cambridge.arm.com> <1229597162.1047.48.camel@penberg-laptop> <1229618308.16418.50.camel@pc1117.cambridge.arm.com> <1229619764.16418.54.camel@pc1117.cambridge.arm.com> <84144f020812181206o3d85fbd3t6b30346d7cf76d9d@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam-Score: -2.6 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 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?