[lkml]   [2009]   [Aug]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [2.6.31-rc6, BTRFS] potential memory leaks...
    On Sun, 2009-08-16 at 13:55 +0100, Daniel J Blueman wrote:
    > On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 5:35 PM, Catalin Marinas<> wrote:
    > > Daniel J Blueman <> wrote:
    > >> There is good chance that the BTRFS kmemleak reports using 2.6.31-rc6
    > >> [1] are false-positives, due to the overwriting of the static pointers
    > >> [2]. Does this ring true with anyone else?
    > >
    > > If you do a few echo scan > /sys/kernel/debug/kmemleak, do they
    > > disappear?
    > >
    > > The static pointers are scanned by kmemleak, unless they are in the
    > > .data.init section (which is removed anyway).
    > The above reports I picked _are_ transient indeed.

    In earlier versions of kmemleak, a block required two successive
    classifications as leak before being reported. Maybe I should go back to
    this approach.

    > Directed more to LKML, every mount (at least on ext4 and BTRFS), we do
    > see persistent reports [1], even after scanning, unmount and more
    > scanning.

    The ext4 leak is real and a patch was proposed here:

    It seems that this patch hasn't been merged into mainline yet (in the
    meantime I merged it in my "kmemleak-fixes" branch on


     \ /
      Last update: 2009-08-16 23:41    [W:0.023 / U:31.192 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site