From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753045AbbCQBsi (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Mar 2015 21:48:38 -0400 Received: from userp1040.oracle.com ([156.151.31.81]:30221 "EHLO userp1040.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752000AbbCQBse (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Mar 2015 21:48:34 -0400 Message-ID: <550787E7.1030604@oracle.com> Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 21:48:23 -0400 From: Sasha Levin User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Steven Rostedt CC: LKML , linux-mm@kvack.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: kill kmemcheck References: <1426074547-21888-1-git-send-email-sasha.levin@oracle.com> <20150311081909.552e2052@grimm.local.home> <55003666.3020100@oracle.com> <20150311084034.04ce6801@grimm.local.home> <55004595.7020304@oracle.com> <20150311102636.6b4110a8@gandalf.local.home> <55005491.5080809@oracle.com> <20150311105210.1855c95e@gandalf.local.home> In-Reply-To: <20150311105210.1855c95e@gandalf.local.home> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Source-IP: aserv0021.oracle.com [141.146.126.233] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 03/11/2015 10:52 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote: >> > Could you try KASan for your use case and see if it potentially uncovers >> > anything new? > The problem is, I don't have a setup to build with the latest compiler. > > I could build with my host compiler (that happens to be 4.9.2), but it > would take a while to build, and is not part of my work flow. > > 4.9.2 is very new, I think it's a bit premature to declare that the > only way to test memory allocations is with the latest and greatest > kernel. > > But if kmemcheck really doesn't work anymore, than perhaps we should > get rid of it. Steven, Since the only objection raised was the too-newiness of GCC 4.9.2/5.0, what would you consider a good time-line for removal? I haven't heard any "over my dead body" objections, so I guess that trying to remove it while no distribution was shipping the compiler that would make it possible was premature. Although, on the other hand, I'd be happy if we can have a reasonable date (that is before my kid goes to college), preferably even before the next LSF/MM so that we could have a mission accomplished thingie with a round of beers and commemorative t-shirts. Thanks, Sasha