From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.158.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 824012F85D7 for ; Thu, 17 Jul 2025 14:22:45 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=148.163.158.5 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1752762167; cv=none; b=YmZusl5tBW+AdPnRXDb8SpizSDRHuZm/KfG+FeFYuOHm7stTVmBAJYzn07lnw68lfzPF8dg2jg/UHMZYm0gnf0w4LbgDc+DqeFNYxRa9aS9Df2H//tMQbGHvkBJzE08ogp3L1G/nD356XQ8b8AFQ3jULOQ2XnIIyZUxsXSUn6Zg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1752762167; c=relaxed/simple; bh=An0pFdgpuHjT2xlaz1aO/B26hRt8Sn/6KAkx4byKjSY=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=iKl1H2sz5RIJ9aA3wVQ8/NGYRBc+xMIZdbMhycTrtyLZaD8zkLb+SkrNmoKO5CEVOR+m21cs00IegLvCTkjUjguZ6oLtbuBp20q6ruAm4/V1thdgG/kfzRne+o1J7cPMJEFDZ0WspgR33gUiXDV+r+IyyKeViHosgHZY7RynfZg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.ibm.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.b=dePpLtgs; arc=none smtp.client-ip=148.163.158.5 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.ibm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.b="dePpLtgs" Received: from pps.filterd (m0360072.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.18.1.2/8.18.1.2) with ESMTP id 56HBJ3Zf027402; Thu, 17 Jul 2025 14:22:26 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to; s=pp1; bh=huxOp1 Dlm2fcDr2K1SY7BcpEyj+J+/qJraT5rXRA+fk=; b=dePpLtgsMbJnMVijtSQZeo FKwYTjfK3kdbJXXonzwm1V7R/VMH3Rk5GrnbLjc8jzJ2eV21ooiCYz0JNY/OBI6N NZ/XyfzE0WuDTTHaljIhGb2hsmbTpTPZds5615WQgxk5sRdVCL0mWnD/RDuaOCvi 4YOhwtaWHkQZkd2U48KzwgM3GKz50ks/cLXBAXS3CQZDkbjhQWIvlFjrl6WKxJy4 Lc/QF6DFXaTFCLwFaqLqs9PlrxC4ZDbwjvtIhy+t5lileIrNPJGs24aU3I20ecQi aXcGZO3gcu3O9LHUzam3uIT+X+knVhdOhNyaMlDdTP/k1V0nB4s9V15Ce7DcwjMQ == Received: from ppma13.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (dd.9e.1632.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [50.22.158.221]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 47ufc7b8qu-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 17 Jul 2025 14:22:26 +0000 (GMT) Received: from pps.filterd (ppma13.dal12v.mail.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma13.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (8.18.1.2/8.18.1.2) with ESMTP id 56HDiS2e000733; Thu, 17 Jul 2025 14:22:25 GMT Received: from smtprelay06.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com ([172.16.1.73]) by ppma13.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 47v48mcavp-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 17 Jul 2025 14:22:25 +0000 Received: from smtpav06.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (smtpav06.dal12v.mail.ibm.com [10.241.53.105]) by smtprelay06.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 56HEMOHm31457912 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 17 Jul 2025 14:22:24 GMT Received: from smtpav06.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B77A58055; Thu, 17 Jul 2025 14:22:24 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtpav06.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45DB058043; Thu, 17 Jul 2025 14:22:22 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [9.79.196.226] (unknown [9.79.196.226]) by smtpav06.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Thu, 17 Jul 2025 14:22:21 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <23039b02-2595-4a6c-962b-fbfa7ae4736d@linux.ibm.com> Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2025 19:52:20 +0530 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-block@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [bug report] kmemleak issue observed during blktests To: Yi Zhang , Ming Lei Cc: Yu Kuai , Jens Axboe , linux-block , Shinichiro Kawasaki , "yukuai (C)" References: <08f3f802-e3c3-b851-b4ee-912eade04c6f@huaweicloud.com> <99b5326f-7ef6-46d8-a423-95b1b4e7c7fb@linux.ibm.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Nilay Shroff In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.4 cv=Je68rVKV c=1 sm=1 tr=0 ts=68790722 cx=c_pps a=AfN7/Ok6k8XGzOShvHwTGQ==:117 a=AfN7/Ok6k8XGzOShvHwTGQ==:17 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=Wb1JkmetP80A:10 a=lYAvP-sluYjmnx_0C4YA:9 a=3ZKOabzyN94A:10 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details-Enc: AW1haW4tMjUwNzE3MDEyNiBTYWx0ZWRfX6ONgkhZVgw1C gDNoXVlRQexmsIBRDY477r0KQXHTh78Su//oKbKftiClD7rSnFFCSpK+xjXJLqIYUhzFtcLxnp/ 4LccRhGYXevxr50E2yBWOYsSakNpNfA0mCPpz486lGdCfPrE7aoWbEng905lUdLIIvbAd7C9reZ bHMPgor7WO/eSNUobtoAfNumwiAZgV2iJdTWDjU9fxqUe/3I93tFTzYWgTmhWFEXus4jyOTYW8s 7KLNH78qWCty0BMtXmz/RKjNIwy+u3ZIMXQsg73LZg2Lsn47kOr41VLk91f8oCgxCV6I1ldwwgE hzVXCmSkG+I0X0LlpZLGWqBLFpAywbJiVOnyYVrU7XWdcNf6dLttKRKrF2HcOETlnHggOsJOY7B XEfrTe/WpKSSZgX/jzGOr/gmpe8D9XH8RutPA+2hsZXVnYtIs3gLgxr7Qqkbzl1z2wz5/gLB X-Proofpoint-GUID: Fq4fS4gYvQGDIr7sQQoEsd84BSEkGfnM X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: Fq4fS4gYvQGDIr7sQQoEsd84BSEkGfnM X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.293,Aquarius:18.0.1099,Hydra:6.1.9,FMLib:17.12.80.40 definitions=2025-07-17_01,2025-07-17_02,2025-03-28_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 impostorscore=0 malwarescore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 suspectscore=0 adultscore=0 priorityscore=1501 clxscore=1015 bulkscore=0 phishscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 mlxscore=0 classifier=spam authscore=0 authtc=n/a authcc= route=outbound adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.19.0-2505280000 definitions=main-2507170126 On 7/17/25 6:16 AM, Yi Zhang wrote: > > Sorry for the late response, it takes me some time to find which case > triggered the kmemleak. > It turns out that block/040[1] triggered the kmemleak, and just > running [2] after block/040 can not trigger the kmemleak immediately. > We have to wait for more time. > [1] > [ 458.175983] null_blk: disk nullb0 created > [ 458.180035] null_blk: module loaded > [ 458.397994] run blktests block/040 at 2025-07-16 20:31:20 > [ 458.571488] null_blk: disk nullb1 created > [ 874.620574] kmemleak: 522 new suspected memory leaks (see > /sys/kernel/debug/kmemleak) > [2] > echo scan >/sys/kernel/debug/kmemleak > This brings to mind a potential improvement: why don’t we enable kmemleak checks in blktests? We could clear the kmemleak state at the beginning of each test, run the test, and then scan for any reported memory leaks. If kmemleak reports a leak, we could: - Mark the test as failed. - Append the leak details to the test log for later review. This would help catch resource leaks more proactively during automated testing. If all agrees, then I could workout a patch to blktests for the above improvement. Thanks, --Nilay