Re: extent-patch and overview of what is supposed to follow

[Lars Heidieker <lars%heidieker.de@localhost>]

On 04/02/11 11:30, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 02, 2011 at 11:08:31AM +0200, Lars Heidieker wrote:
>> On 04/01/11 17:20, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
>>> On Fri, Apr 01, 2011 at 10:43:50AM -0400, Allen Briggs wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Apr 01, 2011 at 08:35:52AM +0200, Lars Heidieker wrote:
>>>>> this is a part of the changes to the kernel memory management.
>>>>> It's a changing the subr_extent to use kmem(9) instead of malloc(9)
>>>>> essentially removing the MALLOC_TYPE from it.
>>>> Are there tools for figuring out where memory might be leaking?
>>>> The MALLOC_TYPE is not ideal for that but can be at least provide
>>>> some clue.
>>> Seconded. It has proven to be very helpfull at times
>>>
>>
>> Yes, I can see the point here but with large parts of memory allocation
>> being moved to kmem any way the point doesn't seem to be very strong
to me.
>
> Why ? A leak is still a leak
>
Sure but even now we wound find a leak that happens if the memory
comes from the kmem allocator, therefore we need a detector there
anyway. malloc currently covers only a small part of allocations.
>> But tracing who is doing the allocation is definitely something worse
>> having, tracing this with dtrace should be possible as Andrew pointed
>> out end january, when I made the patch public.
>
> AFAIK dtrace doesn't work on non-modular kernels ...
I haven't checked but if so it should be made usable on
modular-kernels as well.

-- 
------------------------------------

Mystische Erklärungen:
Die mystischen Erklärungen gelten für tief;
die Wahrheit ist, dass sie noch nicht einmal oberflächlich sind.

   -- Friedrich Nietzsche
   [ Die Fröhliche Wissenschaft Buch 3, 126 ]