Re: [PATCH V2] megaraid: kmemleak: Track page allocation for fusion

2017-09-15 Thread Catalin Marinas
rocess_one_work+0x149/0x360 > worker_thread+0x1d8/0x3c0 > kthread+0x109/0x140 > ret_from_fork+0x25/0x30 > > Signed-off-by: Shu Wang Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas Thanks. -- Catalin

Re: [PATCH] megaraid: kmemleak: Track page allocation for fusion

2017-09-14 Thread Catalin Marinas
ree(fusion); > + } Apart from Bart's comments on braces and comment before kmemleak_alloc(), I'd call kmemleak_free() before free_pages(), otherwise it may not interact nicely with other tools checking for use after free. With that: Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas -- Catalin

Re: blk-mq vs kmemleak

2015-08-03 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Mon, Aug 03, 2015 at 06:05:59PM +0100, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On 08/03/2015 03:43 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 > > pa

Re: blk-mq vs kmemleak

2015-08-03 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Mon, Aug 03, 2015 at 02:33:27PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, Aug 03, 2015 at 11:43:09AM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > The simplest would be to add a kmemleak_not_leak() annotation in > > scsi_init_request(), though you would hide real leaks (if any). > > &

Re: blk-mq vs kmemleak

2015-08-03 Thread Catalin Marinas
t(), though you would hide real leaks (if any). A better way could be to inform kmemleak of these pages, something like below (compile-tested only): 8<- >From b5526babaf4b991fcc530c15563bc9b333f7c86a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Catalin Marinas Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2015

Re: blk-mq vs kmemleak

2015-07-07 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Fri, Jul 03, 2015 at 06:04:00PM +0100, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On 07/03/15 09:11, Dave Jones wrote: > > After a fuzzing run recently, I noticed that the machine had oom'd, and > > killed everything, but there was still 3GB of memory still in use, that > > I couldn't even reclaim with /proc/sys/

Re: [PATCH v1] ata: ahci_xgene: Add AHCI Support for second generation of APM X-Gene SoC

2015-04-01 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 06:30:30PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 06:00:33PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > The driver in general should not be ARM specific, though it runs on an > > ARMv8 platform. But looking at the patch it has some err

Re: [PATCH v1] ata: ahci_xgene: Add AHCI Support for second generation of APM X-Gene SoC

2015-04-01 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 05:39:56PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 12:31:16PM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 12:13:36PM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote: > > > > Signed-off-by : Suman Tripathi > > > > > > Applied to libata/for-4.1 w/ minor edit. > > >