From: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@armlinux.org.uk>
To: "Gan, Yi Fang" <yi.fang.gan@intel.com>
Cc: "Andrew Lunn" <andrew@lunn.ch>,
"Heiner Kallweit" <hkallweit1@gmail.com>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
"Eric Dumazet" <edumazet@google.com>,
"Jakub Kicinski" <kuba@kernel.org>,
"Paolo Abeni" <pabeni@redhat.com>,
"Marek Behún" <kabel@kernel.org>,
"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com"
<linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Looi, Hong Aun" <hong.aun.looi@intel.com>,
"Voon, Weifeng" <weifeng.voon@intel.com>,
"Song, Yoong Siang" <yoong.siang.song@intel.com>,
"Choong, Yong Liang" <yong.liang.choong@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v3 1/1] net: phylink: Add module_exit()
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2024 09:54:54 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZZ+67poJKiNsVmKw@shell.armlinux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <MW6PR11MB8310698247DD950C5EBF5F2CB9682@MW6PR11MB8310.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
On Thu, Jan 11, 2024 at 06:38:58AM +0000, Gan, Yi Fang wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> Regarding the justification on why it is safe to remove phylink,
> we had done some memory leak check when unloading the phylink module.
>
> root@localhost:~# lsmod | grep "phylink"
> phylink 73728 0
> root@localhost:~# rmmod phylink
> root@localhost:~# echo scan > /sys/kernel/debug/kmemleak
> root@localhost:~# cat /sys/kernel/debug/kmemleak
> root@localhost:~#
>
> So far, we didn't observe any memory leaking happened when unloading
> phylink module. Is it sufficient or do you have any other suggestions to check
> on whether the module is safe to remove?
I have no idea why one would think that memory leaks are in some way
related to whether a module can be removed or not. To me at least they
are two separate issues.
I'll continue waiting for the justification...
--
RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTP is here! 80Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@armlinux.org.uk>
To: "Gan, Yi Fang" <yi.fang.gan@intel.com>
Cc: "Andrew Lunn" <andrew@lunn.ch>,
"Heiner Kallweit" <hkallweit1@gmail.com>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
"Eric Dumazet" <edumazet@google.com>,
"Jakub Kicinski" <kuba@kernel.org>,
"Paolo Abeni" <pabeni@redhat.com>,
"Marek Behún" <kabel@kernel.org>,
"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com"
<linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Looi, Hong Aun" <hong.aun.looi@intel.com>,
"Voon, Weifeng" <weifeng.voon@intel.com>,
"Song, Yoong Siang" <yoong.siang.song@intel.com>,
"Choong, Yong Liang" <yong.liang.choong@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v3 1/1] net: phylink: Add module_exit()
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2024 09:54:54 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZZ+67poJKiNsVmKw@shell.armlinux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <MW6PR11MB8310698247DD950C5EBF5F2CB9682@MW6PR11MB8310.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
On Thu, Jan 11, 2024 at 06:38:58AM +0000, Gan, Yi Fang wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> Regarding the justification on why it is safe to remove phylink,
> we had done some memory leak check when unloading the phylink module.
>
> root@localhost:~# lsmod | grep "phylink"
> phylink 73728 0
> root@localhost:~# rmmod phylink
> root@localhost:~# echo scan > /sys/kernel/debug/kmemleak
> root@localhost:~# cat /sys/kernel/debug/kmemleak
> root@localhost:~#
>
> So far, we didn't observe any memory leaking happened when unloading
> phylink module. Is it sufficient or do you have any other suggestions to check
> on whether the module is safe to remove?
I have no idea why one would think that memory leaks are in some way
related to whether a module can be removed or not. To me at least they
are two separate issues.
I'll continue waiting for the justification...
--
RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTP is here! 80Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-01-11 9:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-01-04 10:12 [PATCH net v3 1/1] net: phylink: Add module_exit() Gan, Yi Fang
2024-01-04 10:12 ` Gan, Yi Fang
2024-01-04 13:05 ` Andrew Lunn
2024-01-04 13:05 ` Andrew Lunn
2024-01-11 6:38 ` Gan, Yi Fang
2024-01-11 6:38 ` Gan, Yi Fang
2024-01-11 9:54 ` Russell King (Oracle) [this message]
2024-01-11 9:54 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2024-01-11 13:17 ` Andrew Lunn
2024-01-11 13:17 ` Andrew Lunn
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=ZZ+67poJKiNsVmKw@shell.armlinux.org.uk \
--to=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=andrew@lunn.ch \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=hkallweit1@gmail.com \
--cc=hong.aun.looi@intel.com \
--cc=kabel@kernel.org \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=weifeng.voon@intel.com \
--cc=yi.fang.gan@intel.com \
--cc=yong.liang.choong@intel.com \
--cc=yoong.siang.song@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.