Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CALaQ_hpCKoLxp-0cgxw9TqPGBSzY7RhrnFZ0jGAQ11HbOZkZ3w@mail.gmail.com>
 <20190107095229.uvfuxpglreibxlo4@mbp>
In-Reply-To: <20190107095229.uvfuxpglreibxlo4@mbp>
From:   Nathan Royce <nroycea+kernel@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 11 Jan 2019 01:05:41 -0600
Message-ID: <CALaQ_hraox3anhupk_psorbAwyWK5wN-dHyp6bbGvQteyVWZsg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: kmemleak: Cannot allocate a kmemleak_object structure - Kernel 4.19.13
To:     Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

One more thought that may be nothing, but when kmemleak crashed,
SUnreclaim was at 932552 kB, and after reclaimed/cleared 299840 kB.
There weren't any performance issues like when I had a leak of 5.5 gB
in the 4.18 kernel.

On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 3:52 AM Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> wrote:
>
> Under memory pressure, kmemleak may fail to allocate memory. See this
> patch for an attempt to slightly improve things but it's not a proper
> solution:
>
> http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190102180619.12392-1-cai@lca.pw
>
> --
> Catalin