From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx157.postini.com [74.125.245.157]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E84616B004D for ; Tue, 31 Jul 2012 10:49:59 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <5017EFE9.1080804@parallels.com> Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2012 18:47:05 +0400 From: Glauber Costa MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Common [13/20] Extract a common function for kmem_cache_destroy References: <20120601195245.084749371@linux.com> <20120601195307.063633659@linux.com> <5017C90E.7060706@parallels.com> <5017E8C3.1040004@parallels.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Christoph Lameter Cc: Pekka Enberg , linux-mm@kvack.org, David Rientjes , Matt Mackall , Joonsoo Kim On 07/31/2012 06:42 PM, Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Tue, 31 Jul 2012, Glauber Costa wrote: > >> Since you said you had reworked this, I'll just stop looking for now. >> But would you please make sure that this following use case is well >> tested before you send? >> >> 1) After machine is up, create a bogus cache >> 2) free that cache right away. >> 3) Create two more caches. >> >> The creation of the second cache fails, because >> kmem_cache_alloc(kmem_cache, x) returns bad values. Those bad values can >> take multiple forms, but the most common is a value that is equal to an >> already assigned value. > > If you enable debugging you will see those issues right away and do not > need to infer from other problems that there is an issue in the > allocators. > Yes, but since deleting caches is not a common operation in the kernel, you will have to force somehow. I didn't see anything with debugging enabled, simply because there is no problem at all before you remove the first cache. -- 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