lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Sep]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: [PATCH v3 2/5] kmemleak: add clear command support
    From
    Date
    On Fri, 2009-09-04 at 17:44 -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
    > /*
    > + * We use grey instead of black to ensure we can do future
    > + * scans on the same objects. If we did not do future scans
    > + * these black objects could potentially contain references to
    > + * newly allocated objects in the future and we'd end up with
    > + * false positives.
    > + */
    > +static void kmemleak_clear(void)
    > +{
    > + struct kmemleak_object *object;
    > + unsigned long flags;
    > +
    > + stop_scan_thread();
    > +
    > + rcu_read_lock();
    > + list_for_each_entry_rcu(object, &object_list, object_list) {
    > + spin_lock_irqsave(&object->lock, flags);
    > + if ((object->flags & OBJECT_REPORTED) &&
    > + unreferenced_object(object))
    > + object->min_count = -1;
    > + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&object->lock, flags);
    > + }
    > + rcu_read_unlock();
    > +
    > + start_scan_thread();
    > +}

    Do we need to stop and start the scanning thread here? When starting it,
    it will trigger a memory scan automatically. I don't think we want this
    as a side-effect, so I dropped these lines from your patch.

    Also you set min_count to -1 here which means black object, so a
    subsequent patch corrects it. I'll set min_count to 0 here in case
    anyone bisects over it.

    --
    Catalin



    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2009-09-08 18:15    [W:0.023 / U:2.540 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site