From: "Catalin Marinas" <catalin.marinas@gmail.com>
To: "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: "Pekka J Enberg" <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.17-rc6 7/9] Remove some of the kmemleak false positives
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 23:24:37 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b0943d9e0606121524x1ee55e25rdfa41e5d1edf9dbc@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060612192227.GA5497@elte.hu>
On 12/06/06, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
>
> * Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On 12/06/06, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> 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.
>
> i dont know - i feel uneasy about the 'any pointer' method - it has a
> high potential for false negatives, especially for structures that
> contain strings (or other random data), etc.
That's my concern as well. The advantage is that it simplifies
kmemleak but I can't tell how good the detection would be. I can add
some code to the current implementation to show how many values (32
bit aligned) found during scanning look like valid pointers (i.e.
PAGE_OFFSET < x < PAGE_OFFSET + ram_size) but cannot be found in the
radix_tree. It might not be that bad (I'll post tomorrow some
statistics).
> did you consider the tracking of the types of allocated blocks
> explicitly? I'd expect that most blocks dont have pointers embedded in
> them that point to allocated blocks. For the ones that do, the
> allocation could be extended with the type information. For each
> affected type, we could annotate the structures themselves with offset
> information. How intrusive would such a method be?
Do you mean that when scanning it should only consider at the pointer
members in a structure? I don't think this can be easily achieved
because of the amount of structures in the kernel. There are places
where a pointer is stored as a long. There is also no way in C to
quantify the type of an object (similar to "typeid" in C++). The
closest approximation I could get was the size.
--
Catalin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-06-12 22:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-06-11 11:18 [PATCH 2.6.17-rc6 0/9] Kernel memory leak detector 0.7 Catalin Marinas
2006-06-11 11:21 ` [PATCH 2.6.17-rc6 1/9] Base support for kmemleak Catalin Marinas
2006-06-13 11:14 ` Pekka Enberg
2006-06-13 12:47 ` Catalin Marinas
2006-06-11 11:21 ` [PATCH 2.6.17-rc6 2/9] Some documentation " Catalin Marinas
2006-06-11 11:21 ` [PATCH 2.6.17-rc6 3/9] Add the memory allocation/freeing hooks " Catalin Marinas
2006-06-11 11:21 ` [PATCH 2.6.17-rc6 4/9] Modules support " Catalin Marinas
2006-06-11 11:21 ` [PATCH 2.6.17-rc6 5/9] Add kmemleak support for i386 Catalin Marinas
2006-06-11 11:21 ` [PATCH 2.6.17-rc6 6/9] Add kmemleak support for ARM Catalin Marinas
2006-06-11 11:21 ` [PATCH 2.6.17-rc6 7/9] Remove some of the kmemleak false positives Catalin Marinas
2006-06-12 5:19 ` Pekka Enberg
2006-06-12 8:11 ` Catalin Marinas
2006-06-12 8:17 ` Pekka J Enberg
2006-06-12 8:43 ` Catalin Marinas
2006-06-12 10:53 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-06-12 11:08 ` Pekka J Enberg
2006-06-12 11:36 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-06-12 11:56 ` Pekka J Enberg
2006-06-12 12:53 ` Catalin Marinas
2006-06-12 13:12 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-06-12 14:38 ` Catalin Marinas
2006-06-12 22:29 ` Catalin Marinas
2006-06-12 12:56 ` Catalin Marinas
2006-06-12 19:22 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-06-12 22:24 ` Catalin Marinas [this message]
2006-06-13 5:53 ` Pekka J Enberg
2006-06-13 6:59 ` Catalin Marinas
2006-06-13 7:57 ` Pekka J Enberg
2006-06-13 9:45 ` Catalin Marinas
2006-06-13 10:04 ` Pekka Enberg
2006-06-13 10:37 ` Catalin Marinas
2006-06-13 7:26 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-06-13 8:11 ` Pekka J Enberg
2006-06-13 10:49 ` Catalin Marinas
2006-06-14 4:07 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-06-14 5:46 ` Andi Kleen
2006-06-14 5:53 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2006-06-14 12:03 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-06-14 13:46 ` Catalin Marinas
2006-06-14 13:35 ` Catalin Marinas
2006-06-14 13:21 ` Catalin Marinas
2006-06-12 9:17 ` Peter Zijlstra
2006-06-12 9:35 ` Catalin Marinas
2006-06-24 10:20 ` Catalin Marinas
2006-06-24 10:22 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-06-24 10:55 ` Catalin Marinas
2006-07-24 11:15 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-07-24 13:28 ` Catalin Marinas
2006-08-03 6:32 ` Jakub Jelinek
2006-08-03 8:31 ` Catalin Marinas
2006-06-11 11:22 ` [PATCH 2.6.17-rc6 8/9] Simple testing for kmemleak Catalin Marinas
2006-06-11 11:22 ` [PATCH 2.6.17-rc6 9/9] Keep the __init functions after initialization Catalin Marinas
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=b0943d9e0606121524x1ee55e25rdfa41e5d1edf9dbc@mail.gmail.com \
--to=catalin.marinas@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=penberg@cs.helsinki.fi \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®