lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Jan]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/1] kmemleak/module: only scan the existed data section
On 28 December 2011 08:11, Tiejun Chen <tiejun.chen@windriver.com> wrote:
> We should only scan the sections containing data and it's size is not
> zero as well.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tiejun Chen <tiejun.chen@windriver.com>
> ---
>  kernel/module.c |    2 ++
>  1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/module.c b/kernel/module.c
> index 12cfa2b..0b93c30 100644
> --- a/kernel/module.c
> +++ b/kernel/module.c
> @@ -2045,6 +2045,8 @@ static void kmemleak_load_module(struct module *mod, Elf_Ehdr *hdr,
>                if (strncmp(secstrings + sechdrs[i].sh_name, ".data", 5) != 0
>                    && strncmp(secstrings + sechdrs[i].sh_name, ".bss", 4) != 0)
>                        continue;
> +               if (sechdrs[i].sh_size == 0)
> +                       continue;
>
>                kmemleak_scan_area((void *)sechdrs[i].sh_addr,
>                                   sechdrs[i].sh_size, GFP_KERNEL);

I would rather move this check to kmemleak.c. But why would it be
needed? Performance? A zero-size area shouldn't be scanned anyway.

--
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-01-09 13:09    [W:0.065 / U:0.668 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site