Re: status of kernel memory debugging?

[Willem de Bruijn <wdb@few.vu.nl>]

> UML is still too strange for valgrind, despite progress on both sides
> (valgrind accepting more strange things and UML becoming less
> strange).
>
> I tried grinding UML a month or so ago, and its use of clone was a
> sticking point.
>

I think I read your remark, yes. Thanks for the update; I hoped some strides 
had been made in that direction since then. Personally,  I know to little 
about the topic to be of any use.

I guess the best option is then using slab caches per object type, so that I 
can at least find obvious memory leaks. 

On a sidenote, it'll be interesting to see what valgrind reports once (if?) 
the kernel gets a good grinding. 

Willem