Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Tue, 15 Aug 2006 16:26:34 +0100 | | From | "Catalin Marinas" <> | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2.6.18-rc4 00/10] Kernel memory leak detector 0.9 |
| |
On 15/08/06, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@gmail.com> wrote: > On 14/08/06, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@gmail.com> wrote: > > The kmemleak+slab locking is a bit complicated because memleak itself > > needs to allocate memory and avoid recursive calls to it (the > > pointer_cache and the radix_tree allocations). The kmemleak-related > > allocations are not tracked by kmemleak. > > > > I see the following solutions: > > > > 1. acquire the memleak_lock at the beginning of an alloc/free function > > and release it when finished while allowing recursive/nested calls > > (and only call the memleak_* functions during the outermost lock). > > This would mean ignoring the off-slab management allocations as these > > would lead to deadlock because of the recursive call into kmemleak. > > This locking should be placed around cache_reap() as well (actually, > > around all the entry points in the mm/slab.c file). > > This would actually work because the slab allocation functions may sleep.
I meant "would *not*" above.
-- Catalin - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |