From: ext Catalin Marinas catalin.mari...@arm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] kmemleak: Fix false positive with special scan
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 16:12:29 +0200
On Wed, 2010-06-02 at 12:34 +0100, Hiroshi DOYU wrote:
From: ext Catalin Marinas catalin.mari...@arm.com
Can we not add a new prio
Hi,
Sorry for the delay, I eventually got the time to look at your patches.
On Tue, 2010-06-01 at 11:25 +0100, Hiroshi DOYU wrote:
There is a false positive case that a pointer is calculated by other
methods than the usual container_of macro. kmemleak_ignore can cover
such a false positive,
From: ext Catalin Marinas catalin.mari...@arm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] kmemleak: Fix false positive with special scan
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 12:01:24 +0200
Hi,
Sorry for the delay, I eventually got the time to look at your patches.
Thank you for your review.
On Tue, 2010-06-01 at 11
From: Hiroshi DOYU hiroshi.d...@nokia.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] kmemleak: Fix false positive with special scan
Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2010 14:34:58 +0300 (EEST)
From: ext Catalin Marinas catalin.mari...@arm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] kmemleak: Fix false positive with special scan
Date
On Wed, 2010-06-02 at 12:34 +0100, Hiroshi DOYU wrote:
From: ext Catalin Marinas catalin.mari...@arm.com
Can we not add a new prio tree (or just use the existing one) for
pointer aliases? The advantage is that you only have a single function
to call, something like kmemleak_add_alias() and
Hi,
There is a false positive case that a pointer is calculated by other
methods than the usual container_of macro. kmemleak_ignore can cover
such a false positive, but it would loose the advantage of memory leak
detection. This patch allows kmemleak to work with such false
positives by
