Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 31 Aug 2009 10:38:13 +0200 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2] kmemleak: Ignore the aperture memory hole on x86_64 |
| |
* Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 2009-08-29 at 15:31 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> wrote: > > > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/aperture_64.c > > > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/aperture_64.c > > > @@ -20,6 +20,7 @@ > > > #include <linux/bitops.h> > > > #include <linux/ioport.h> > > > #include <linux/suspend.h> > > > +#include <linux/kmemleak.h> > > > #include <asm/e820.h> > > > #include <asm/io.h> > > > #include <asm/iommu.h> > > > @@ -94,6 +95,11 @@ static u32 __init allocate_aperture(void) > > > * code for safe > > > */ > > > p = __alloc_bootmem_nopanic(aper_size, aper_size, 512ULL<<20); > > > + /* > > > + * Kmemleak should not scan this block as it may not be mapped via the > > > + * kernel direct mapping. > > > + */ > > > + kmemleak_ignore(p); > > > if (!p || __pa(p)+aper_size > 0xffffffff) { > > > printk(KERN_ERR > > > "Cannot allocate aperture memory hole (%p,%uK)\n", > > > > This sure does not look right for the rare but theoretically > > possible !p case, does it? > > All the kmemleak_* callbacks check for (p && !IS_ERR(p)), just to > simplify the calling site.
Indeed, i see. It's OK this way then.
Ingo
| |