Re: possible memory leak or memory waste

[Rajkumar Manoharan <rmanohar@qti.qualcomm.com>]

On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 07:42:35AM +0200, Michal Kazior wrote:
> On 26 May 2015 at 02:07, Sebastian Gottschall <s.gottschall@dd-wrt.com> wrote:
> > Am 26.05.2015 um 01:42 schrieb Ben Greear:
> >>
> >> Can you test with ath9k to make sure it is actually ath10k related?
> >
> > already tested. this device has 2 chipsets. one is ath9k based and the
> > second is ath10k based. :-)
> > only if i kill the hostapd process which controls ath10k. the memory waste
> > is gone
> 
> Keep in mind that hostapd itself requires memory to function as well.
> Each process (and thread) need some internal kernel memory (stack, et
> al).
>
Have seen simialar issue long hours run in mbssid mode with multi-client.
Killing hostapd regains memory.

[<c021dd44>] (unwind_backtrace) from [<c021ae0c>] (show_stack+0x10/0x14)
[<c021ae0c>] (show_stack) from [<c0336b9c>] (dump_stack+0x88/0xcc)
[<c0336b9c>] (dump_stack) from [<c0279804>] (dump_header.isra.11+0x64/0x178)
[<c0279804>] (dump_header.isra.11) from [<c0279b10>] (oom_kill_process+0x70/0x384)
[<c0279b10>] (oom_kill_process) from [<c027a2a0>] (out_of_memory+0x2d4/0x304)
[<c027a2a0>] (out_of_memory) from [<c027d180>] (__alloc_pages_nodemask+0x608/0x664)
[<c027d180>] (__alloc_pages_nodemask) from [<c0278780>] (filemap_fault+0x1f8/0x390)
[<c0278780>] (filemap_fault) from [<c028f45c>] (__do_fault+0xa4/0x42c)
[<c028f45c>] (__do_fault) from [<c0292494>] (handle_mm_fault+0x230/0x7b0)
[<c0292494>] (handle_mm_fault) from [<c021f70c>] (do_page_fault+0x114/0x26c)
[<c021f70c>] (do_page_fault) from [<c0208440>] (do_PrefetchAbort+0x34/0x98)

Need to check whether it is a regression or not.

-Rajkumar

_______________________________________________
ath10k mailing list
ath10k@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k