Re: Major slab mem leak with 2.6.17 / GCC 4.1.1

[Catalin Marinas]

On 16/10/06, Mike Galbraith <efault@xxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-10-16 at 09:07 +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > Kmemleak introduces some overhead but shouldn't be that bad.
> > DEBUG_SLAB also introduces an overhead by erasing the data in the
> > allocated blocks.
>
> 2.6.18 with your rc6 patch booted normally with stack unwind enabled.

The only difference is that kmemleak now uses save_stack_trace() to
generate the call chain. In the previous versions I implemented a
simple stack backtrace myself, with the disadvantage that it only
worked on ARM and x86.

I think kmemleak should use the common stack trace API and investigate
why it is slower (either save_stack_trace is slower with stack unwind
enabled or kmemleak doesn't use these functions properly).

--
Catalin
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/