From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756654AbXHBDEF (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Aug 2007 23:04:05 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753952AbXHBDDx (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Aug 2007 23:03:53 -0400 Received: from palinux.external.hp.com ([192.25.206.14]:56424 "EHLO mail.parisc-linux.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753783AbXHBDDw (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Aug 2007 23:03:52 -0400 Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2007 21:03:50 -0600 From: Matthew Wilcox To: Andrew Morton Cc: Jesper Juhl , Eric Moore , DL-MPTFusionLinux@lsi.com, Linux Kernel Mailing List , support@lsi.com, mpt_linux_developer@lsi.com, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, James Bottomley Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix two potential mem leaks in MPT Fusion (mpt_attach()) Message-ID: <20070802030350.GF21219@parisc-linux.org> References: <200708020155.33690.jesper.juhl@gmail.com> <20070801172653.1fd44e99.akpm@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070801172653.1fd44e99.akpm@linux-foundation.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Aug 01, 2007 at 05:26:53PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > Why on earth is that using GFP_ATOMIC? This function later goes on to > create procfs files and such things. Seems fairly common in driver initialisation code. I removed three instances of this in the advansys driver. > y'know, we could have a debug option which will spit warnings if someone > does a !__GFP_WAIT allocation while !in_atomic() (only works if > CONFIG_PREEMPT). > > But please, make it depend on !CONFIG_AKPM. I shudder to think about all > the stuff it would pick up. Seems like you'd get a lot of false positives. How about a call: slab_warn_about_atomic_allocs(); right before calling the initcalls, and then slab_stop_warning_about_atomic_allocs(); after calling them? That should give people a lot to chew on for a few months. Obviously, you would need to not warn about allocations from interrupt context, as you say above. -- "Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this operating system, but compare it to ours. We can't possibly take such a retrograde step."