From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EE2BBC43334 for ; Mon, 13 Jun 2022 03:29:43 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:List-Subscribe:List-Help :List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:Content-Type: MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=d7lelOyaghHCGHT5Hdiu5y3UeqylUZluyrjfLETc/UU=; b=1KMFE99ew2+iuHOVbuzMUo1Ief qxm71OqWcbQCNxmAca6Pnrxt/08mdO1+ttYM8RWKujEPsrPxRjYbNCXBhNtWsq1yLCU+QAMIlN8Di +zpwFGexkQyI6j0hmZ17ePic5ZqQxUIfqG3/FeLPaJNRbq4oOQMs7GmhrZBfITpWKI0yF8ikUOonj J4FeSvxsSm2f8JGc2KESScFHD9xdT0mn9f3FDjfd9JY85ZBtDBmxSHBq/H3KW/2MjteLuCrqYoEl3 /piM++719J5uHvsyqsZU0YF5jMQlGbPNkbOtlhBnQgZbXINaUpODIH2q5DWBbZGcTmptKiCATmm5n wNx7pL1w==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1o0all-0013n7-0P; Mon, 13 Jun 2022 03:29:37 +0000 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.133.124]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1o0ale-0013lQ-Tk for linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 13 Jun 2022 03:29:32 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1655090968; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=d7lelOyaghHCGHT5Hdiu5y3UeqylUZluyrjfLETc/UU=; b=LsWL12i2FSSkLKpRSJaT+wq00UFZva+KFC5Hm2xKqVBRyzVA1MFf9RWeBxmNHL8VIBmiBq JBGAf/pBV+QyUT3sLZhnyT6ACUK1o4pT4A4bX7sQN8Bxn+yNgqUmRiADH0zI014XtYFy/f 3EktMxZtoLRaZajIRLMZSeRa6GiQiEQ= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast-mx02.redhat.com [66.187.233.88]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-578-9GWpwyEyMrmQztOWcRU11A-1; Sun, 12 Jun 2022 23:29:24 -0400 X-MC-Unique: 9GWpwyEyMrmQztOWcRU11A-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx07.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.7]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5F4EE801755; Mon, 13 Jun 2022 03:29:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from T590 (ovpn-8-18.pek2.redhat.com [10.72.8.18]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E78CB1410F34; Mon, 13 Jun 2022 03:29:20 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2022 11:29:15 +0800 From: Ming Lei To: Yi Zhang Cc: linux-block , "open list:NVM EXPRESS DRIVER" Subject: Re: [bug report] kmemleak observed from blktests on latest linux-block/for-next Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.85 on 10.11.54.7 X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20220612_202931_082787_89D3799E X-CRM114-Status: UNSURE ( 9.34 ) X-CRM114-Notice: Please train this message. X-BeenThere: linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "Linux-nvme" Errors-To: linux-nvme-bounces+linux-nvme=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Sun, Jun 12, 2022 at 03:23:36PM +0800, Yi Zhang wrote: > Hello > I found below kmemleak with the latest linux-block/for-next[1], pls > help check it, thanks. > > [1] > 75d6654eb3ab (origin/for-next) Merge branch 'for-5.19/block' into for-next Hi Yi, for-5.19/block should be stale, and seems not see such issue when running blktests on v5.19-rc2. Thanks, Ming