On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 5:45 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:
> I'd say it's borderline. It's fixing a tracking bug. Unless others feel
> strongly otherwise, I don't think it's stable material.
ok thanks for your feedback.
--
William
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kerne
On 11/25/2015 04:04 AM, William Dauchy wrote:
Hi Jens,
On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 7:21 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:
On 09/14/2015 11:16 AM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
The pages allocated for struct request contain pointers to other slab
allocations (via ops->init_request). Since kmemleak does not track/sc
Hi Jens,
On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 7:21 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 09/14/2015 11:16 AM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
>>
>> The pages allocated for struct request contain pointers to other slab
>> allocations (via ops->init_request). Since kmemleak does not track/scan
>> page allocations, the slab objects
On 09/14/2015 11:16 AM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
The pages allocated for struct request contain pointers to other slab
allocations (via ops->init_request). Since kmemleak does not track/scan
page allocations, the slab objects will be reported as leaks (false
positives). This patch adds kmemleak cal
The pages allocated for struct request contain pointers to other slab
allocations (via ops->init_request). Since kmemleak does not track/scan
page allocations, the slab objects will be reported as leaks (false
positives). This patch adds kmemleak callbacks to allow tracking of such
pages.
Signed-o
5 matches
Mail list logo
