Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-23211-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1;
Feedback-ID: i494840e7:Fastmail
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2024 10:20:27 +0200
From: Ido Schimmel <idosch@idosch.org>
To: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Cc: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>, joro@8bytes.org, will@kernel.org,
	iommu@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	zhangzekun11@huawei.com, john.g.garry@oracle.com,
	dheerajkumar.srivastava@amd.com, jsnitsel@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/2] iommu/iova: Make the rcache depot properly
 flexible
Message-ID: <ZZ-ky9UCoHwbyqfn@shredder>
References: <cover.1694535580.git.robin.murphy@arm.com>
 <ZY1osaGLyT-sdKE8@shredder>
 <c9cf02b5-7add-46ea-8db1-46fdce191c1c@arm.com>
 <ZZ2AqZT4dD-s01q9@shredder>
 <ab22c439-e7da-49b5-b20b-856daf376c02@arm.com>
 <ZZ7atzgT6_kOvWnJ@arm.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ZZ7atzgT6_kOvWnJ@arm.com>

On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 05:58:15PM +0000, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> Transient false positives are possible, especially as the code doesn't
> use a double-linked list (for the latter, kmemleak does checksumming and
> detects the prev/next change, defers the reporting until the object
> becomes stable). That said, if a new scan is forced (echo scan >
> /sys/kernel/debug/kmemleak), are the same objects still listed as leaks?
> If yes, they may not be transient.

We are doing "scan" and "clear" after each test. I will disable the
"clear" and see if the leaks persist.