From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751938AbWFLM4N (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jun 2006 08:56:13 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751939AbWFLM4M (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jun 2006 08:56:12 -0400 Received: from nz-out-0102.google.com ([64.233.162.194]:29530 "EHLO nz-out-0102.google.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751938AbWFLM4M (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jun 2006 08:56:12 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=T+7LAlmFzux6eHfM5v3C+FN/2yYAi8EnCrbJtenukWXkWJoKOV8L1Y+1sFYaaN3s9gUbKyY3/9kSNOuNifaXrijcLrrwqZ0rtom3TVmX1QGkK6XjBLjC66yolmgRzzNwQuD92BpzPFHT8DDGBLN0zvHfBEifgf3Q9q7DZoIJvyg= Message-ID: Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 13:56:11 +0100 From: "Catalin Marinas" To: "Ingo Molnar" Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.17-rc6 7/9] Remove some of the kmemleak false positives Cc: "Pekka J Enberg" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20060612105345.GA8418@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20060611111815.8641.7879.stgit@localhost.localdomain> <20060611112156.8641.94787.stgit@localhost.localdomain> <84144f020606112219m445a3ccas7a95c7339ca5fa10@mail.gmail.com> <20060612105345.GA8418@elte.hu> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 12/06/06, Ingo Molnar wrote: > What i'd like to see though are clear explanations about why an > allocation is not considered a leak, in terms of comments added to the > code. That will also help us reduce the number of annotations later on. I'll document them in both Documentation/kmemleak.txt and inside the code. If I implement the "any pointer inside the block" method, all the memleak_padding() false positives will disappear. -- Catalin