Displaying 20 results from an estimated 2000 matches similar to: "[PATCH] headers: untangle kmemleak.h from mm.h"
2018 Feb 12
2
[PATCH] headers: untangle kmemleak.h from mm.h
On 02/12/2018 04:28 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Randy Dunlap <rdunlap at infradead.org> writes:
>
>> From: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap at infradead.org>
>>
>> Currently <linux/slab.h> #includes <linux/kmemleak.h> for no obvious
>> reason. It looks like it's only a convenience, so remove kmemleak.h
>> from slab.h and add
2018 Feb 12
2
[PATCH] headers: untangle kmemleak.h from mm.h
On 02/12/2018 04:28 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Randy Dunlap <rdunlap at infradead.org> writes:
>
>> From: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap at infradead.org>
>>
>> Currently <linux/slab.h> #includes <linux/kmemleak.h> for no obvious
>> reason. It looks like it's only a convenience, so remove kmemleak.h
>> from slab.h and add
2018 Feb 13
0
[PATCH] headers: untangle kmemleak.h from mm.h
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap at infradead.org> writes:
> On 02/12/2018 04:28 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
>> Randy Dunlap <rdunlap at infradead.org> writes:
>>
>>> From: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap at infradead.org>
>>>
>>> Currently <linux/slab.h> #includes <linux/kmemleak.h> for no obvious
>>> reason. It looks like it's
2018 Feb 12
0
[PATCH] headers: untangle kmemleak.h from mm.h
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap at infradead.org> writes:
> From: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap at infradead.org>
>
> Currently <linux/slab.h> #includes <linux/kmemleak.h> for no obvious
> reason. It looks like it's only a convenience, so remove kmemleak.h
> from slab.h and add <linux/kmemleak.h> to any users of kmemleak_*
> that don't already #include it.
2018 Feb 12
0
[PATCH] headers: untangle kmemleak.h from mm.h
* Randy Dunlap <rdunlap at infradead.org> wrote:
> From: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap at infradead.org>
>
> Currently <linux/slab.h> #includes <linux/kmemleak.h> for no obvious
> reason. It looks like it's only a convenience, so remove kmemleak.h
> from slab.h and add <linux/kmemleak.h> to any users of kmemleak_*
> that don't already #include it.
2013 Jan 11
3
[PATCH] virtio: suppress kmemleak false positive
While doing simple IPv6 tests in KVM virtual machines,
(add an IPv6 address to eth0) kmemleak complains about
an unreferenced object:
unreferenced object 0xffff88001e804120 (size 32):
comm "softirq", pid 0, jiffies 4294900928 (age 631.544s)
hex dump (first 32 bytes):
28 cb fd 1d 00 00 00 00 0c 00 00 00 01 00 01 00 (...............
02 d0 83 1d 00 00 00 00 6e 00 00 00 00 00
2013 Jan 11
3
[PATCH] virtio: suppress kmemleak false positive
While doing simple IPv6 tests in KVM virtual machines,
(add an IPv6 address to eth0) kmemleak complains about
an unreferenced object:
unreferenced object 0xffff88001e804120 (size 32):
comm "softirq", pid 0, jiffies 4294900928 (age 631.544s)
hex dump (first 32 bytes):
28 cb fd 1d 00 00 00 00 0c 00 00 00 01 00 01 00 (...............
02 d0 83 1d 00 00 00 00 6e 00 00 00 00 00
2014 Feb 11
6
[PATCH 0/3] tools/virtio: build fixes for virtio_test
Recent changes to drivers/virtio broke compilation for the tests in
tools/virtio. The following patches are build fixes for those changes, as well
as a fix for a typo that would have never built.
The changes were tested on my amd64 system against 3.14-rc2.
Joel Stanley (3):
tools/virtio: update internal copies of headers
tools/virtio: fix missing kmemleak_ignore symbol
tools/virtio: add a
2014 Feb 11
6
[PATCH 0/3] tools/virtio: build fixes for virtio_test
Recent changes to drivers/virtio broke compilation for the tests in
tools/virtio. The following patches are build fixes for those changes, as well
as a fix for a typo that would have never built.
The changes were tested on my amd64 system against 3.14-rc2.
Joel Stanley (3):
tools/virtio: update internal copies of headers
tools/virtio: fix missing kmemleak_ignore symbol
tools/virtio: add a
2014 Oct 16
2
[PATCH] drm/nouveau: Do not leak client objects
From: Thierry Reding <treding at nvidia.com>
The memory allocated for a nouveau_cli object in nouveau_cli_create() is
never freed. Free the memory in nouveau_cli_destroy() to plug this leak.
kmemleak recorded this after running a couple of nouveau test programs.
Note that kmemleak points at drm_open_helper() because for some reason
it thinks that skipping the first two stack frames is a
2019 May 17
4
drm/nouveau/core/memory: kmemleak 684 new suspected memory leaks
Hello,
5.1.0-next-20190517
I'm looking at quite a lot of kmemleak reports coming from
drm/nouveau/core/memory, all of which are:
unreferenced object 0xffff8deec27c4ac0 (size 16):
comm "Web Content", pid 5309, jiffies 4309675011 (age 68.076s)
hex dump (first 16 bytes):
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................
backtrace:
2019 Jun 14
2
memory leak in vhost_net_ioctl
Hello Syzbot
On Fri, 14 Jun 2019 02:26:02 +0800 syzbot wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> syzbot has tested the proposed patch but the reproducer still triggered crash:
> memory leak in vhost_net_ioctl
>
Oh sorry for my poor patch.
> ANGE): hsr_slave_1: link becomes ready
> 2019/06/13 18:24:57 executed programs: 18
> BUG: memory leak
> unreferenced object 0xffff88811cbc6ac0
2019 Jun 14
2
memory leak in vhost_net_ioctl
Hello Syzbot
On Fri, 14 Jun 2019 02:26:02 +0800 syzbot wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> syzbot has tested the proposed patch but the reproducer still triggered crash:
> memory leak in vhost_net_ioctl
>
Oh sorry for my poor patch.
> ANGE): hsr_slave_1: link becomes ready
> 2019/06/13 18:24:57 executed programs: 18
> BUG: memory leak
> unreferenced object 0xffff88811cbc6ac0
2013 Oct 02
2
Kmemleak: false-positive in vring_add_indirect ?
Hello,
I have been hunting a memory-leak warning in vring_add_indirect:
unreferenced object 0xffff88003d467e20 (size 32):
comm "softirq", pid 0, jiffies 4295197765 (age 6.364s)
hex dump (first 32 bytes):
28 19 bf 3d 00 00 00 00 0c 00 00 00 01 00 01 00 (..=............
02 dc 51 3c 00 00 00 00 56 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ..Q<....V.......
backtrace:
2013 Oct 02
2
Kmemleak: false-positive in vring_add_indirect ?
Hello,
I have been hunting a memory-leak warning in vring_add_indirect:
unreferenced object 0xffff88003d467e20 (size 32):
comm "softirq", pid 0, jiffies 4295197765 (age 6.364s)
hex dump (first 32 bytes):
28 19 bf 3d 00 00 00 00 0c 00 00 00 01 00 01 00 (..=............
02 dc 51 3c 00 00 00 00 56 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ..Q<....V.......
backtrace:
2013 Oct 04
1
Kmemleak: false-positive in vring_add_indirect ?
On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 1:59 AM, Rusty Russell <rusty at rustcorp.com.au> wrote:
> Thanks! Does this work?
>
> virtio_ring: plug kmemleak false positive.
>
> unreferenced object 0xffff88003d467e20 (size 32):
> comm "softirq", pid 0, jiffies 4295197765 (age 6.364s)
> hex dump (first 32 bytes):
> 28 19 bf 3d 00 00 00 00 0c 00 00 00 01 00 01 00
2013 Oct 04
1
Kmemleak: false-positive in vring_add_indirect ?
On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 1:59 AM, Rusty Russell <rusty at rustcorp.com.au> wrote:
> Thanks! Does this work?
>
> virtio_ring: plug kmemleak false positive.
>
> unreferenced object 0xffff88003d467e20 (size 32):
> comm "softirq", pid 0, jiffies 4295197765 (age 6.364s)
> hex dump (first 32 bytes):
> 28 19 bf 3d 00 00 00 00 0c 00 00 00 01 00 01 00
2014 Apr 01
2
[PULL] virtio-next
The following changes since commit 33807f4f0daec3b00565c2932d95f614f5833adf:
Merge branch 'for-next' of git://git.samba.org/sfrench/cifs-2.6 (2014-03-11 11:53:42 -0700)
are available in the git repository at:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rusty/linux.git tags/virtio-next-for-linus
for you to fetch changes up to fc4324b4597c4eb8907207e82f9a6acec84dd335:
2014 Apr 01
2
[PULL] virtio-next
The following changes since commit 33807f4f0daec3b00565c2932d95f614f5833adf:
Merge branch 'for-next' of git://git.samba.org/sfrench/cifs-2.6 (2014-03-11 11:53:42 -0700)
are available in the git repository at:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rusty/linux.git tags/virtio-next-for-linus
for you to fetch changes up to fc4324b4597c4eb8907207e82f9a6acec84dd335:
2013 Aug 19
11
[RFC PATCH] Btrfs: fix memory leak of orphan block rsv
When adding orphans to an inode''s root, we start a transaction for
that root that when ended in several places such as for example
extent-tree.c:btrfs_remove_block_group(), inode.c:btrfs_unlink() and
inode.c:btrfs_evict_node(), doesn''t result in a commit, that is,
inode.c:btrfs_orphan_commit_root() doesn''t get called (via
transaction.c:commit_fs_roots()).
The respective