Message-ID: <4C505F86.7050509@cs.helsinki.fi>
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2010 19:49:10 +0300
From: Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Macintosh/20100228)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Daniel J Blueman <daniel.blueman@gmail.com>
CC: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@gmail.com>,
        Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [2.6.35-rc6 patch] increase kmemleak robustness at boot
References: <AANLkTin-9jtHP1xmhUp4uUQNZD64pN3Ee5Kn2cqH64Go@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTin-9jtHP1xmhUp4uUQNZD64pN3Ee5Kn2cqH64Go@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 832
Lines: 18

Daniel J Blueman wrote:
> I've consistently been experiencing kmemleak exhaust it's 400-entry
> early-boot buffer and disabling itself; there have been reports of
> this also, and I'm finding this on x86-64 with various debug options
> enabled.
> 
> If we issue a warning and allow the buffer to wrap, we don't need to
> hit the kill-switch. While we lose track of some early potential
> leaks, it's better than no functionality.
> 
> Let me know if it's acceptable, and many thanks for such an excellent tool,

Is it just potential leaks that we lose or can this cause false positives?
--
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/