Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/14] Kernel memory leak detector
From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
In-Reply-To: <20090108144538.e5195575.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
References: <20081219181255.7778.52219.stgit@pc1117.cambridge.arm.com>
	 <20090108144538.e5195575.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Content-Type: text/plain
Organization: ARM Ltd
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 09:51:06 +0000
Message-Id: <1231753866.10982.11.camel@pc1117.cambridge.arm.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1276
Lines: 36

Hi Andrew,

On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 14:45 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Dec 2008 18:12:56 +0000
> Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> wrote:
> 
> > A new kmemleak version is available.
> 
> Sorry, I'll drop this.  The level of code churn in linux-next (during
> the merge window!) means that I've basically lost confidence that my
> lameass fixed-up code will still even work.

OK. I noticed some minor conflicts with 2.6.29-rc1 but I'll have a look
at linux-next as well. IIRC, is the -mm tree based on top of linux-next?

> > git://linux-arm.org/linux-2.6.git kmemleak
> 
> It might be better to add that to linux-next.  If we want to merge
> kmemleak.

I would feel a bit more comfortable if kmemleak lived for (at least) a
release cycle in the -mm tree so that it may get wider testing. As I
said, I mainly tested it on ARM.

If you are OK with this, I'll update the branch and make sure there are
as few conflicts as possible (the alternative is patches by e-mail and
based on top of linux-next).

-- 
Catalin

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/