Re: [PATCH 2.6.17-rc6 7/9] Remove some of the kmemleak false positives

From: Ingo Molnar
Date: Mon Jul 24 2006 - 07:26:24 EST

* Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> > To the other extreme is Ingo's suggestion of using exact type
> > identification but I don't think this would be acceptable for the
> > kernel as it would to modify all the memory alloc calls in the
> > kernel to either pass an additional parameter (the type id) or
> > another post-allocation call to kmemleak to update the id.
> passing in the type ID wouldnt be that bad and it would have other
> advantages as well: for example we could do strict type-checking of
> allocation size versus type-we-use-it-for.
> As long as the conversion is gradual i think we could try this. I.e.
> we'd default to 'no ID passed', and in that case we would fall back to
> the size-based method and generate an ID out of the structure size.

update: there's also a neat gcc extension trick suggested by Arjan:
__builtin_classify_type(). This converts types into integers!

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at