[lkml]   [2009]   [Aug]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Possible memory leak via alloc_pid()
Catalin Marinas <> writes:

> On Sun, 2009-08-02 at 18:44 -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> Hmm. I'm starting to wonder if kmemleak is right. I don't know how
>> it works but something about the way pids are used might be confusing it.
> It could as well be a false positive but I can't find its source.
> Basically, the pid structure for the dead Xorg is still allocated
> minutes after Xorg died with a pid->count of 2. Kmemleak scans the data
> and bss sections, task stacks and most of the allocated objects (which
> are not reported as leaks) but cannot find a pointer to this pid
> structure (or anywhere inside it like pid->number.pid_chain).
> The supposedly leaked pid structure also have pid_chain.pprev ==
> LIST_POISON2 which means that it was already removed from the pid_hash
> (this block of memory is scanned by kmemleak anyway).
> The free_pid() function was also called on this object according to the
> pid->rcu values but put_pid() couldn't free it because of pid->count.
> If this structure in not on pid_hash, is there any other place where its
> pointer may be stored for a long time? Otherwise it looks like a real
> leak (though not a big one).

It depends on how it is used. Pids not on the pid_hash are perfectly
fine. We use these kinds of long standing pid references to prevent
any chance that pid rollover would be a problem. There are corner
cases in the SIGIO path and a few other places where we have
these kind of long standing pid references.

Perhaps it comes from the tty switching code?

> I'll do more tests in the next few days as suggested by Oleg.

Thanks, and thanks for spotting into and looking into this.


 \ /
  Last update: 2009-08-10 21:25    [W:0.048 / U:0.948 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site