Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 17 Aug 2006 16:45:02 +0200 | From | "Michal Piotrowski" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2.6.18-rc4 00/10] Kernel memory leak detector 0.9 |
| |
Hi Catalin,
On 17/08/06, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@gmail.com> wrote: > On 13/08/06, Michal Piotrowski <michal.k.k.piotrowski@gmail.com> wrote: > > It's kmemleak 0.9 issue. I have tested kmemleak 0.8 on 2.6.18-rc1and > > 2.6.18-rc2. I haven't seen this before. > > it looks like it was caused by commit > fc818301a8a39fedd7f0a71f878f29130c72193d where free_block() now calls > slab_destroy() with l3->list_lock held.
I'll revert this commit.
> > The prio_tree use (which doesn't alloc memory) instead of the > radix_tree is about 4 times slower when scanning the memory and I > don't think I'll use it. > > It leaves me with the options of either implementing my own memory > allocator based on pages (including a simple hash table instead of > radix tree) or fix the locking in kmemleak so that memory allocations > happen without memleak_lock held. The latter is a bit complicated as > well since any slab allocation causes a re-entrance into kmemleak. > > Any other suggestions?
Please talk with Christoph Lameter, he is working on Modular Slab. http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0608.1/0951.html http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0608.2/0030.html Maybe he can help with this problem.
> > Thanks. > > -- > Catalin >
Regards, Michal
-- Michal K. K. Piotrowski LTG - Linux Testers Group (http://www.stardust.webpages.pl/ltg/wiki/) - 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/
| |