Running kmemleak without sysfs support
Hello all, Can I make any use of kmemcheck if I don't have sysfs kernel support enabled? thanks, Daniel.
On Thu, 2011-01-20 at 10:41 +0000, Daniel Baluta wrote:
Can I make any use of kmemcheck if I don't have sysfs kernel support enabled?
Kmemleak can scan output the memory and report the number of leaked objects but if you need to get additional information about the leaked objects (like backtrace), you need debugfs enabled. DEBUG_FS doesn't seem to be dependent on SYSFS but I never tried to enable one without the other (you might be able to mount the DEBUG_FS somewhere other than /sys/kernel/debug/). -- Catalin
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 12:41:57PM +0200, Daniel Baluta wrote:
Hello all,
Can I make any use of kmemcheck if I don't have sysfs kernel support enabled?
Why would you ever want to run a kernel without sysfs support? If you turn it off, you loose a _lot_ of functionality that you will need to add back to your system in some other manner. What, specifically, is wrong with sysfs that is solved by turning it off? thanks, greg k-h
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 5:56 PM, Greg KH <greg@kroah.com> wrote:
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 12:41:57PM +0200, Daniel Baluta wrote:
Hello all,
Can I make any use of kmemcheck if I don't have sysfs kernel support enabled?
Why would you ever want to run a kernel without sysfs support? If you turn it off, you loose a _lot_ of functionality that you will need to add back to your system in some other manner.
I totally agree with you. But we've done it to save memory.
What, specifically, is wrong with sysfs that is solved by turning it off?
There's nothing wrong with sysfs. In fact, I like it! thanks, Daniel.
On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 11:26:43AM +0200, Daniel Baluta wrote:
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 5:56 PM, Greg KH <greg@kroah.com> wrote:
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 12:41:57PM +0200, Daniel Baluta wrote:
Hello all,
Can I make any use of kmemcheck if I don't have sysfs kernel support enabled?
Why would you ever want to run a kernel without sysfs support? If you turn it off, you loose a _lot_ of functionality that you will need to add back to your system in some other manner.
I totally agree with you. But we've done it to save memory.
Does it really save memory? If so, how much and what is your budget for memory? Are you worried about swapable or non-swapable memory usage?
What, specifically, is wrong with sysfs that is solved by turning it off?
There's nothing wrong with sysfs. In fact, I like it!
Then you should turn it back on, it will save you a whole lot of grief in the end :) good luck, greg k-h
participants (3)
-
Catalin Marinas -
Daniel Baluta -
Greg KH