From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 690E927EC80; Tue, 2 Sep 2025 18:50:27 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1756839027; cv=none; b=unp9YTfHBCO90LbSUBcaW/iaxikxV1P2dIPgrC/vBoFGfd8jtihxX+tsF5uWnDBvc8bP5+R9oNpZe9W3Z6nlfWt1fUF8R/wCFcD5oQ9I51BswbFsQL9BAoVPnadVwBKvgefJYYWJsSfghnL9rx5ysE0SsGXAnju1DsdQZsYJPL4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1756839027; c=relaxed/simple; bh=3f1QlWQggQFlWHsbX6W+fm41fKE8JQ+mTvYxr1R3j/o=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:Subject: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=P8VZ8w4Zr/rVK+MF/RGZ2EFM78jjCJDnoXFUba6hjVlhSi9Xzse5MfN+jx4XUekn6lzl7yfslpVqpdSnUBtcxnCpdCWz8YvPc4IUGOaBX8/I1vpkHM3vnuQZ+2FcIQT45h6jTVDxMxeJjUyi1erLq/0plp51h/LktAeDDQuhI3M= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=W2WUiAWC; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="W2WUiAWC" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 22E1AC4CEED; Tue, 2 Sep 2025 18:50:22 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1756839026; bh=3f1QlWQggQFlWHsbX6W+fm41fKE8JQ+mTvYxr1R3j/o=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:From; b=W2WUiAWC6ZYJkUKJTOqFW4ab6h/q1xSGEMW8iGGKsXYva7sw0A4o/XNsDiuT7HqDK XYRoF+LiDkAuaXU3Rs0GImCm6zzlJvRDnUHHtXQtNFHtx4qb6G132fBh5D3V24XdEb KI6da4hyNmUuo+QqBwBLQcoJcc/T2a8ujPX0dKnXPmJvwMgYmMe7zP7+9+eSP6RWES 2gWESOeZp745gOx4qI+fVA//BIGhqFqnNuNDF1n1Sez3lxruA1GVs96kQQM+tXDnXx tcylUEw8nAsrKkdRezdS8JJP7ZkxtHQwwzZWoDcFwXLx3wtGTa1ZPUM8eIVXWGk86m 0fkpSXcfTcNwA== Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2025 20:50:19 +0200 (GMT+02:00) From: Matthieu Baerts To: Catalin Marinas Cc: Jakub Kicinski , mptcp@lists.linux.dev, Mat Martineau , Geliang Tang , "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Paolo Abeni , Simon Horman , Jonathan Corbet , Shuah Khan , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, Eric Biggers , Christoph Paasch , Gang Yan Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: <20250901-net-next-mptcp-misc-feat-6-18-v1-0-80ae80d2b903@kernel.org> <20250902072600.2a9be439@kernel.org> <834238b4-3549-4062-a29b-bf9c5aefa30f@kernel.org> <20250902082759.1e7813b8@kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/6] mptcp: misc. features for v6.18 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Correlation-ID: Hi Catalin, 2 Sept 2025 20:25:19 Catalin Marinas : > On Tue, Sep 02, 2025 at 08:27:59AM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote: >> On Tue, 2 Sep 2025 16:51:47 +0200 Matthieu Baerts wrote: >>> It is unclear why a second scan is needed and only the second one caught >>> something. Was it the same with the strange issues you mentioned in >>> driver tests? Do you think I should re-add the second scan + cat? >> >> Not sure, cc: Catalin, from experience it seems like second scan often >> surfaces issues the first scan missed. > > It's some of the kmemleak heuristics to reduce false positives. It does > a checksum of the object during scanning and only reports a leak if the > checksum is the same in two consecutive scans. Thank you for the explanation! Does that mean a scan should be triggered at the end of the tests, then wait 5 second for the grace period, then trigger another scan and check the results? Or wait 5 seconds, then trigger two consecutive scans? Cheers, Matt