On Fri 03-02-17 13:06:04, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> On next-20170125 running some kselftest not yet upstream I eventually
> get a kmemleak splat:
>
> unreferenced object 0xffffa7b1034b4000 (size 16384):
> comm "driver_data.sh", pid 6506, jiffies 4295068366 (age 1697.272s)
> hex dump (first 32 bytes):
> 9d 6e ac 57 00 00 00 00 74 2d 64 72 69 76 65 72 .n.W....t-driver
> 5f 64 61 74 61 2e 62 69 6e 0a 00 00 00 00 00 00 _data.bin.......
> backtrace:
> [<ffffffff9005f7fa>] kmemleak_alloc+0x4a/0xa0
> [<ffffffff8fbe7006>] __vmalloc_node_range+0x206/0x2a0
> [<ffffffff8fa7f3e9>] copy_process.part.36+0x609/0x1cc0
> [<ffffffff8fa80c77>] _do_fork+0xd7/0x390
> [<ffffffff8fa80fd9>] SyS_clone+0x19/0x20
> [<ffffffff8fa03b4b>] do_syscall_64+0x5b/0xc0
> [<ffffffff9006b3af>] return_from_SYSCALL_64+0x0/0x6a
> [<ffffffffffffffff>] 0xffffffffffffffff
>
> As per gdb:
>
> (gdb) l *(copy_process+0x609)
> 0xffffffff8107f3e9 is in copy_process (kernel/fork.c:204).
> warning: Source file is more recent than executable.
> 199 /*
> 200 * We can't call find_vm_area() in interrupt context, and
> 201 * free_thread_stack() can be called in interrupt context,
> 202 * so cache the vm_struct.
> 203 */
> 204 if (stack) {
> 205 tsk->stack_vm_area = find_vm_area(stack);
> 206 }
> 207 return stack;
> 208 #else
Could you check the state of the above process (pid 6506)? Does it still
own its stack? From a quick check I do not see any leak there either.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
