From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753041AbYDBLBY (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Apr 2008 07:01:24 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754642AbYDBLBR (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Apr 2008 07:01:17 -0400 Received: from rv-out-0910.google.com ([209.85.198.188]:41324 "EHLO rv-out-0910.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753527AbYDBLBQ (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Apr 2008 07:01:16 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=LIhQqaqADGSguQBeuffHVCp6eYNKpZ02Yuix/ZPSAp4t+7Go+NKDLRVQuTGeDaSu+T9sV2p2Y0QQ5N7eKOK0XYP90yEdNba7HCIJEzgkiYjWnaL1bWL/NvAT4V9KdWy0siiAG6kOgMqXMIdCv42k06zOlQ6RLzoxIG7NoyGSyf4= Message-ID: <84144f020804020401j4e5863dcofd16662baa54574@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 14:01:13 +0300 From: "Pekka Enberg" To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com Subject: Re: kmemcheck caught read from freed memory (cfq_free_io_context) Cc: "Ingo Molnar" , "Jens Axboe" , "Peter Zijlstra" , "Vegard Nossum" , "Linux Kernel Mailing List" In-Reply-To: <20080402105539.GA5610@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <19f34abd0804011408v19e13b6cje1ca89a2a471484c@mail.gmail.com> <1207085788.29991.6.camel@lappy> <20080402071709.GC12774@kernel.dk> <20080402072456.GI12774@kernel.dk> <20080402072846.GA16454@elte.hu> <20080402105539.GA5610@linux.vnet.ibm.com> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 5adf9ad90a727635 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Paul, On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 1:55 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > I will check this when I get back to some bandwidth -- but in the meantime, > does kmemcheck special-case SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU? It is legal to access > newly-freed items in that case, as long as you did rcu_read_lock() > before gaining a reference to them and don't hold the reference past > the matching rcu_read_unlock(). No, kmemcheck is work in progress and does not know about SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU yet. The reason I asked Vegard to post the warning was because Peter, Vegard, and myself identified this particular warning as a real problem. But yeah, kmemcheck can cause false positives for RCU for now. Pekka