From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dave Jones Subject: Re: blk-mq vs kmemleak Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2015 13:07:17 -0400 Message-ID: <20150703170717.GA10928@codemonkey.org.uk> References: <20150703161137.GA10438@codemonkey.org.uk> <5596C080.4050009@sandisk.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from arcturus.aphlor.org ([188.246.204.175]:43707 "EHLO arcturus.aphlor.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755154AbbGCRH0 (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Jul 2015 13:07:26 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5596C080.4050009@sandisk.com> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Bart Van Assche Cc: Catalin Marinas , "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" On Fri, Jul 03, 2015 at 10:04:00AM -0700, 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/vm/drop_caches > > ... > > I'm wondering if there's just some annotation missing to appease kmemleak, > > because I'm seeing thousands of these. > > > > Or it could be a real leak, but it seems surprising no-one else is complaining. > > Dave, with which kernel version has this behavior been observed ? Linus' current tree Dave