From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail137.messagelabs.com (mail137.messagelabs.com [216.82.249.19]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B46566B004D for ; Wed, 8 Jul 2009 05:36:36 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] kmemleak: Add callbacks to the bootmem allocator From: Catalin Marinas In-Reply-To: <1247035701.15919.35.camel@penberg-laptop> References: <20090706104654.16051.44029.stgit@pc1117.cambridge.arm.com> <20090706105155.16051.59597.stgit@pc1117.cambridge.arm.com> <1246950530.24285.7.camel@penberg-laptop> <20090707165350.GA2782@cmpxchg.org> <1247004586.5710.16.camel@pc1117.cambridge.arm.com> <1247035701.15919.35.camel@penberg-laptop> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 08 Jul 2009 10:43:51 +0100 Message-Id: <1247046231.6595.14.camel@pc1117.cambridge.arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Pekka Enberg Cc: Johannes Weiner , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar List-ID: On Wed, 2009-07-08 at 09:48 +0300, Pekka Enberg wrote: > On Tue, 2009-07-07 at 23:09 +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > On Tue, 2009-07-07 at 18:53 +0200, Johannes Weiner wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 07, 2009 at 10:08:50AM +0300, Pekka Enberg wrote: > > > > On Mon, 2009-07-06 at 11:51 +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > > > > @@ -597,7 +601,9 @@ restart: > > > > > void * __init __alloc_bootmem_nopanic(unsigned long size, unsigned long align, > > > > > unsigned long goal) > > > > > { > > > > > - return ___alloc_bootmem_nopanic(size, align, goal, 0); > > > > > + void *ptr = ___alloc_bootmem_nopanic(size, align, goal, 0); > > > > > + kmemleak_alloc(ptr, size, 1, GFP_KERNEL); > > > > > + return ptr; > > > > > > You may get an object from kzalloc() here, I don't think you want to > > > track that (again), right? > > > > You are write, I missed the alloc_arch_preferred_bootmem() function > > which may call kzalloc(). > > > > > Pekka already worked out all the central places to catch 'slab already > > > available' allocations, they can probably help you place the hooks. > > > > It seems that alloc_bootmem_core() is central to all the bootmem > > allocations. Is it OK to place the kmemleak_alloc hook only in this > > function? > > I think so. Johannes? To get a better view, here's the complete patch: kmemleak: Add callbacks to the bootmem allocator From: Catalin Marinas This patch adds kmemleak_alloc/free callbacks to the bootmem allocator. This would allow scanning of such blocks and help avoiding a whole class of false positives and more kmemleak annotations. Signed-off-by: Catalin Marinas Cc: Ingo Molnar Cc: Pekka Enberg --- mm/bootmem.c | 5 +++++ 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/mm/bootmem.c b/mm/bootmem.c index d2a9ce9..90f3ed0 100644 --- a/mm/bootmem.c +++ b/mm/bootmem.c @@ -335,6 +335,8 @@ void __init free_bootmem_node(pg_data_t *pgdat, unsigned long physaddr, { unsigned long start, end; + kmemleak_free_part(__va(physaddr), size); + start = PFN_UP(physaddr); end = PFN_DOWN(physaddr + size); @@ -354,6 +356,8 @@ void __init free_bootmem(unsigned long addr, unsigned long size) { unsigned long start, end; + kmemleak_free_part(__va(addr), size); + start = PFN_UP(addr); end = PFN_DOWN(addr + size); @@ -516,6 +520,7 @@ find_block: region = phys_to_virt(PFN_PHYS(bdata->node_min_pfn) + start_off); memset(region, 0, size); + kmemleak_alloc(region, size, 1, 0); return region; } -- Catalin -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org